User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:39:01 PM EDT
[#1]
What if you had a cake business and took the order for the gay cake, then your religiously inclined employee asserted their free association rights ....? Keep employee, do cake yourself, fire employee for whatever?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:40:51 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The only thing to do is to never do anything that will anger liberals. it will cost us the white house. gay marriage is soooooooooooooooooooo popular that judges need to force states to do it against the will of the legislature. dude, we are so cool with gays now. in fact, we all wish we were gay to be that cool. I think homosexual intercourse should be mandatory at public schools. How else will people understand? And those BIGOT HATE-MONGER home schoolers should not be exempt! Let's see the look on those evil Christians faces when they find out the are required to fuck their own kids! HA-HA! |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:41:41 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What if you had a cake business and took the order for the gay cake, then your religiously inclined employee asserted their free association rights ....? Keep employee, do cake yourself, fire employee for whatever? If the employee is violating the employment agreement (i.e. Contract) then if you want to fire them, fire them. Pretty simple. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:42:09 PM EDT
[#4]
Frankly, I believe a private business should be able to discriminate in any way they wish.
Don't want to serve left-handed African Americans who believe in Thor? Suits me. None of my business. Don't want my money? Fine. I'll go somewhere else. The market will decide whether your decision succeeds or not. I know, I know.... I just want to bring back slavery and such. Yeah, yeah... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:42:28 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes. And complaining about it is the correct response as is taking your business elsewhere if you feel strongly enough. It should not be a legal matter. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
But isn't ARFCOM always complaining bitterly about Muslim cashiers who won't ring up a customer with alcohol or pork products, or Muslim taxi drivers who refuse service to people with seeing-eye dogs? Yes. And complaining about it is the correct response as is taking your business elsewhere if you feel strongly enough. It should not be a legal matter. Bingo! |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:43:46 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What if you had a cake business and took the order for the gay cake, then your religiously inclined employee asserted their free association rights ....? Keep employee, do cake yourself, fire employee for whatever? or what about the 90% of your other customers who may no longer use you. Now what. The simple thing is people gt to choose for themselves and not be forced. period. Sorry if it gets the gays worked up, but I'm pretty sure it won't be long before they find some other "cause" |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:50:17 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The bill signing makes Indiana the 20th state in the nation to adopt such legislation. It is modeled on the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which President Bill Clinton signed in 1993. But "they" didn't have the momentum and bully pulpit they do now, back then. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 4:04:24 PM EDT
[#8]
It is not a stupid law.
People bitching about it are stupid. It is a law that allows people to practice capitalism by their own rules. So sick of people saying that not being comfortable with homosexuality means you hate homos. Just like you get to choose where to spend you money, you should also get to choose whose money you will accept. Commerce should ALWAYS be voluntary for BOTH parties. Anyone who says otherwise is a dirty fucking COMMUNIST! |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 4:23:57 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Today I had a far leftist argue that not only is this law horrible, but since churches get tax breaks it is totally fine for the government to force "regulations" and "guidelines" on churches regarding same sex marriage. So I assume once they get their way on laws like this and forcing business to do things, churches are next. Then again, this is also the person who thinks a sex selective abortion that occurs 3 seconds before a natural birth at 9 months is perfectly fine, so she might be crazy. But she is an actual lawyer. Its almost shocking how many believe that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 4:26:30 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Its almost shocking how many believe that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Today I had a far leftist argue that not only is this law horrible, but since churches get tax breaks it is totally fine for the government to force "regulations" and "guidelines" on churches regarding same sex marriage. So I assume once they get their way on laws like this and forcing business to do things, churches are next. Then again, this is also the person who thinks a sex selective abortion that occurs 3 seconds before a natural birth at 9 months is perfectly fine, so she might be crazy. But she is an actual lawyer. Its almost shocking how many believe that. Do you mean on this site--or in general? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 4:32:14 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do you mean on this site--or in general? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Today I had a far leftist argue that not only is this law horrible, but since churches get tax breaks it is totally fine for the government to force "regulations" and "guidelines" on churches regarding same sex marriage. So I assume once they get their way on laws like this and forcing business to do things, churches are next. Then again, this is also the person who thinks a sex selective abortion that occurs 3 seconds before a natural birth at 9 months is perfectly fine, so she might be crazy. But she is an actual lawyer. Its almost shocking how many believe that. Do you mean on this site--or in general? In real life.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 4:42:42 PM EDT
[#12]
Fuck homos.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 4:44:26 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Pretty much. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's fascinating how "my civil rights and freedoms are more important AND trump your civil rights and freedoms..." Yup |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 4:50:49 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Meh. There shouldn't be a law that allows you to discriminate. It should simply not be illegal in the first place. Let everyone do business with whomever they will, for whatever reasons seem best to them. Let the market sort it out. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Anyone think this is going to set up an interesting supreme court case? ...gay and lesbian civil rights cases? ...gay, lesbian, and transgender special protections, "affirmative action" quotas? You mean the law that is almost identical to the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act? The one the Supreme Court has not only upheld, but expanded? That Indiana law? http://reason.com/blog/2015/03/24/indianas-so-called-right-to-discriminate It's the spin that is concerning. ...and there is some spin. IMHO the reason the gay-rights lobby is freaking out about this law is because it seriously hinders their efforts to marginalize and stigmatize religious beliefs about homosexuality. That's why they are furiously spinning this as some kind of "license to discriminate"; their social agenda is at stake. Meh. There shouldn't be a law that allows you to discriminate. It should simply not be illegal in the first place. Let everyone do business with whomever they will, for whatever reasons seem best to them. Let the market sort it out. Precisely. Plus you can't legislate away bigotry. You can legislate away the overt signs, but all you do is cause a deep seated underlying resentment that will manifest itself in other ways. My fiancé and I had this debate today. We get married in October. What if two couples, one heterosexual and one homosexual, want the reception hall on the same day. If we get it will the homosexual couple sue for discrimination and get it while we the heterosexual couple loses out. If the homosexual couple feels they got substandard service, will they sue arguing its because they were gay? This is simply not something the government should be involved with, let the market solve the issue. A wedding hall is not a necessity in life, neither is a wedding cake. There are other options, they are pushing the issue to further an agenda. How long until they sue the Catholic Church arguing that its discrimination not to marry a homosexual couple? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 4:54:11 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The only thing to do is to never do anything that will anger liberals. it will cost us the white house. gay marriage is soooooooooooooooooooo popular that judges need to force states to do it against the will of the legislature. dude, we are so cool with gays now. in fact, we all wish we were gay to be that cool. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 4:54:23 PM EDT
[#16]
Apparently Conn. calling out Indiana may involve hypocrisy.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/can-connecticut-criticize-indiana-when-it-has-its-own-religious-liberty-law/ More broad than Indiana's law says one critic. But Connecticut’s anti-discrimination laws are subject to religious exemptions under its RFRA. Via GLAD, “Although the exemption is broad, it is not a carte blanche for an employer to use his or her religious beliefs as justification for discriminating against a gay or transgender person.” But over at the Federalist, Sean Davis argues that Connecticut’s religious exemption law is broader than either Indiana’s or the federal government’s by prohibiting any intrusion on the practice of religion, while the others forbid only a “substantial burden.” |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:00:32 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Meh. There shouldn't be a law that allows you to discriminate. It should simply not be illegal in the first place. Let everyone do business with whomever they will, for whatever reasons seem best to them. Let the market sort it out. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Anyone think this is going to set up an interesting supreme court case? ...gay and lesbian civil rights cases? ...gay, lesbian, and transgender special protections, "affirmative action" quotas? You mean the law that is almost identical to the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act? The one the Supreme Court has not only upheld, but expanded? That Indiana law? http://reason.com/blog/2015/03/24/indianas-so-called-right-to-discriminate It's the spin that is concerning. ...and there is some spin. IMHO the reason the gay-rights lobby is freaking out about this law is because it seriously hinders their efforts to marginalize and stigmatize religious beliefs about homosexuality. That's why they are furiously spinning this as some kind of "license to discriminate"; their social agenda is at stake. Meh. There shouldn't be a law that allows you to discriminate. It should simply not be illegal in the first place. Let everyone do business with whomever they will, for whatever reasons seem best to them. Let the market sort it out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:02:07 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ain't no scriptural basis for kicking gays out of your store. There's a big difference between "kicking gays out of your store" and being forced to help facilitate an act that violates your deeply held values. Forcing a Christian cake shop owner to bake a gay wedding cake is no different than forcing a Muslim print shop owner to print portraits of Muhammad or an Atheist print shop to print evangelical tracts for some church in town. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:04:22 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, actually, the Bible does state that homosexuality is an abomination. But, this law isn't about gays, per se. The gay community has just taken up the fight because they always have to be the oppressed party in any situation -- hurt feelings and all that. They're always looking for a fight, and have to be loud and boisterous. It's about religious freedoms such as a muslim being able to avoid preparing pork, a Christian anesthesiologist not having to assist in an abortion, a homosexual baker not having to bake 100 cakes with "God hates fags" inscribed on them for the Westboro Baptist Church, etc. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Ain't no scriptural basis for kicking gays out of your store. Well, actually, the Bible does state that homosexuality is an abomination. But, this law isn't about gays, per se. The gay community has just taken up the fight because they always have to be the oppressed party in any situation -- hurt feelings and all that. They're always looking for a fight, and have to be loud and boisterous. It's about religious freedoms such as a muslim being able to avoid preparing pork, a Christian anesthesiologist not having to assist in an abortion, a homosexual baker not having to bake 100 cakes with "God hates fags" inscribed on them for the Westboro Baptist Church, etc. Looks like you pretty much beat me to the punch on this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:05:25 PM EDT
[#20]
If you recall the Supreme Court already ruled a few years ago that businesses are individuals in regard to political donations.
I'm guessing they will rule the same if this case came before them and would assert that since individuals have a right to choose who they associate with, hence businesses do as well. All the hand wringing by the left yet none are saying to take it to the SC...because they know they'd loose. Course liberals would never accept the ruling (they never do), though they insist conservatives accept all pro-leftist rulings...but that's how the hypocritical mentally ill rolls. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:15:12 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: IN has already "lost" some major things, I'm just waiting to see if these organizations take their business to a state that already has this law on the books. If they do, I'll be rubbing noses in it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: 20 states and the Fed have it, it's a trend. But they'll likely lose the Final Four and some NCAA business....NCAA will meanwhile be defending slavery of college athletes....  Two can play that game. If the NCAA wants to asshats about it, I can easily turn off the TV and encourage others to do the same. If they do, I'll be rubbing noses in it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:26:12 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
19 states that have ‘religious freedom’ laws like Indiana’s that no one is boycotting Forty percent of U.S. states have something similar to Indiana, as does the federal government. A federal RFRA signed by President Clinton in 1993 shares language with Indiana and other states' bills, prohibiting the government from "substantially burdening" individuals' exercise of religion unless it is for a "compelling government interest" and is doing so in the least restrictive means. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/03/27/19-states-that-have-religious-freedom-laws-like-indianas-that-no-one-is-boycotting/ That makes me wonder if the groups calling for a boycott of Indiana will move all their conventions and whatever's off shore. After all if it's so bad they have to boycott then will they boycott the entire U.S. for the federal law? (sarcasm off) |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:29:23 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That makes me wonder if the groups calling for a boycott of Indiana will move all their conventions and whatever's off shore. After all if it's so bad they have to boycott then will they boycott the entire U.S. for the federal law? (sarcasm off) Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 19 states that have ‘religious freedom’ laws like Indiana’s that no one is boycotting Forty percent of U.S. states have something similar to Indiana, as does the federal government. A federal RFRA signed by President Clinton in 1993 shares language with Indiana and other states' bills, prohibiting the government from "substantially burdening" individuals' exercise of religion unless it is for a "compelling government interest" and is doing so in the least restrictive means. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/03/27/19-states-that-have-religious-freedom-laws-like-indianas-that-no-one-is-boycotting/ That makes me wonder if the groups calling for a boycott of Indiana will move all their conventions and whatever's off shore. After all if it's so bad they have to boycott then will they boycott the entire U.S. for the federal law? (sarcasm off) |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:30:47 PM EDT
[#24]
All I know is that Im tired of being discriminated against by lesbians at bars simply due to my hetero status...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:38:55 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There are lots of ways to express that idea. Why does the discussion of gays always come down to "shoving things down my throat"? I'm not Freud or anything, but sheesh. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Because we all believe we are entitled to our opinions, whether right or not?  There are lots of ways to express that idea. Why does the discussion of gays always come down to "shoving things down my throat"? I'm not Freud or anything, but sheesh. The hole thing is just a pain in the ass. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:39:53 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Fuck homos. No thanks. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:39:55 PM EDT
[#27]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:44:45 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There's a big difference between "kicking gays out of your store" and being forced to help facilitate an act that violates your deeply held values. Forcing a Christian cake shop owner to bake a gay wedding cake is no different than forcing a Muslim print shop owner to print portraits of Muhammad or an Atheist print shop to print evangelical tracts for some church in town. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Ain't no scriptural basis for kicking gays out of your store. There's a big difference between "kicking gays out of your store" and being forced to help facilitate an act that violates your deeply held values. Forcing a Christian cake shop owner to bake a gay wedding cake is no different than forcing a Muslim print shop owner to print portraits of Muhammad or an Atheist print shop to print evangelical tracts for some church in town. 1) You're right and I agree. 2) Thats not my point. Kicking gays out of your store because they're gay is what I'm talking about. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:50:37 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So can I refuse to make a cake for, say, a pinko based on the fact that I just don't fucking like them? In a free society, all exchanges of goods and services are voluntary. If that were the case, then the answer to your question is "yes." However, if your store had a sign that said "open to the public" and you refused service to Michael Moore, then you would have committed fraud. The elephant in the room is that the "public accomodations" part of the Civil Right Act flies in the face of my first sentence above and was a taking of property rights. Anyone who correctly identifies the euphemism for what it is, gets to be labeled a racist. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 8:59:56 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Fuck homos. Well, if you wander around your town a little, I am sure you will find someone to help you out on that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 9:13:08 PM EDT
[#31]
Go to a Jewish Owned bakery and ask for this.
I see both sides point. Why would you want a bakery that didn't agree with your point of view doing your wedding cake? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 9:18:31 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why would you want a bakery that didn't agree with your point of view doing your wedding cake? To be obnoxious pot stirring douche nozzles. Really, that's all it comes down to. Couple could have walked away, cursing the bakery under their breath and found someone else, but instead decide to throw their little narcissistic temper tantrums and get government involved. Now we have to have laws on top of laws on top of laws from daddy government because all parties involved couldn't act like fuckin' adults. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 9:18:47 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The fact that this is turning into a Christians vs. Gays thing is exactly what the left wants. It is about a business having the right to conduct what business they want, with who they want to conduct it with. Just like a Muslim who owns a catering company shouldn't be forced to furnish a pig roast, a PETA member shouldn't be forced to frame pictures of a kids first kill, a T - shirt company owner who is the son or daughter of a police officer shouldn't be forced to make "hands up don't shoot" shirts, etc. etc. The point is the government should not force a business owner to conduct business that goes against their fundamental beliefs. If refusing it gets them bad press that hurts their company and helps their competitors, then oh well. That's the free market, and the way that it should work. You shouldn't have tunnel vision on the left's talking points of "if you support this bill you are a homophobic bigot!" It is a much bigger issue than that, but the left knows that if they put it in a certain light, they can get the support they really need for what they want. Control. It is all, and only, about control, and the incremental steps it takes to get there. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
All this fucking angst over gays is gonna cost the right the whitehouse again. How important is it that some fucker sucks dick compared to keeping commies out of the whitehouse. People need to get their shit and priorities in order. The fact that this is turning into a Christians vs. Gays thing is exactly what the left wants. It is about a business having the right to conduct what business they want, with who they want to conduct it with. Just like a Muslim who owns a catering company shouldn't be forced to furnish a pig roast, a PETA member shouldn't be forced to frame pictures of a kids first kill, a T - shirt company owner who is the son or daughter of a police officer shouldn't be forced to make "hands up don't shoot" shirts, etc. etc. The point is the government should not force a business owner to conduct business that goes against their fundamental beliefs. If refusing it gets them bad press that hurts their company and helps their competitors, then oh well. That's the free market, and the way that it should work. You shouldn't have tunnel vision on the left's talking points of "if you support this bill you are a homophobic bigot!" It is a much bigger issue than that, but the left knows that if they put it in a certain light, they can get the support they really need for what they want. Control. It is all, and only, about control, and the incremental steps it takes to get there. Besides gays, who are the people who wrote the law worried about? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:03:18 PM EDT
[#34]
It boggles my mind how being gay = protected class.
For years homosexuality was defined as a sexual deviancy, a mental disorder, in the same classification as transsexual, bestiality, pedophilia, etc. They psychiatric community after much pressure removed this classification and now considers homosexuality as "normal". Political correctness however does not change the fact that homosexuality deviates from the normal human behavior of heterosexuality. We are hardwired as are all animals to engage intercourse in order to reproduce, enjoyment of said act is just a side effect. However there are few people who instead have a misfire that attracts them to the same gender, how this is not defined as a mental disorder anymore shows the pull of the LGBT community. People are getting fed up by the media/liberals telling us that this deviancy is "normal" and it is showing in 20 states legislation. I tolerate homosexual behavior, what someone does in their bedroom is their business. I refuse however to "accept" this behavior as normal and natural and have it constantly rammed down my throat (theoretical) by the media and militant LGBT community. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:12:55 PM EDT
[#35]
Meh.
A truly free society is free to discriminate. If that discrimination is bad for one's business or reputation, a truly free market would correct it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 7:36:29 AM EDT
[#36]
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 8:17:12 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: People are getting fed up by the media/liberals telling us that this deviancy is "normal" and it is showing in 20 states legislation. I tolerate homosexual behavior, what someone does in their bedroom is their business. I refuse however to "accept" this behavior as normal and natural and have it constantly rammed down my throat (theoretical) by the media and militant LGBT community. The LGBTQWTFBBQDERP side would have your business sued out of existence and make you personally bankrupt..... See how tolerant they are? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 8:29:10 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What major things has IN lost? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 20 states and the Fed have it, it's a trend. But they'll likely lose the Final Four and some NCAA business....NCAA will meanwhile be defending slavery of college athletes.... Two can play that game. If the NCAA wants to asshats about it, I can easily turn off the TV and encourage others to do the same. If they do, I'll be rubbing noses in it. Forgive me for not posting links, gotta start working in a minute. ETA - Gen Con was one, but apparently they've decided to honor their contract in the last few days. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 8:31:02 AM EDT
[#39]
Quoted:
The Indiana law that 'fell off the stupid tree' (from cnbc) "Let's be 100-percent clear: Indiana's brand new Religious Freedom Law is a measure that fell off the stupid tree and hit every branch on the way down. And I say that as not only a conservative, but a religious conservative... "more at link http://www.cnbc.com/id/102541800 More links: Gov Mike Pence-R press conference. http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2015/03/25/gov-mike-pence-sign-religious-freedom-bill-thursday/70448858/ ESPN article http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/12574928/big-ten-officials-discuss-new-indiana-religious-objections-law What say you? I say bully for a common sense law that eliminates all the special laws for all those special people. I know, I know....we just can't seem to bend over enough for those groups who demand special treatment, can we?    
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 8:33:37 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
IMHO the reason the gay-rights lobby is freaking out about this law is because it seriously hinders their efforts to marginalize and stigmatize religious beliefs about homosexuality. That's why they are furiously spinning this as some kind of "license to discriminate"; their social agenda is at stake. The libs want to destroy Christianity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 8:35:22 AM EDT
[#41]
The Georgia legislature is working on a similar bill. Honestly, I don’t care if a baker won’t make a wedding cake for a gay couple and they have to walk down the street to another baker. I care that some Moslem woman will use the law as a defense for cutting her infant daughter’s labia off with a dull steak knife.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 8:36:40 AM EDT
[#42]
So CONN's Gov just drove his car into the "stupid tree."
Conn. Governor To Ban Travel To Indiana Over Religious Freedom Law His State Has Too Connecticut Gov. Dannell Malloy will issue an executive order on Monday calling for a ban on state-funded travel to Indiana because of its new law, which he believes is intended to discriminate against gays. Only problem: Connecticut has a similar law on the books. As The Federalist’s Sean Davis notes, Connecticut’s law, which was signed on June 29, 1993, is more strict, at least in terms of its language. While Indiana’s law includes language prohibiting the state from creating a "substantial” burden against an individuals’ exercise of their religion, Connecticut’s does not use the "substantial” qualifier. It reads that "The state or any political subdivision of the state shall not burden a person’s exercise of religion.” |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 8:58:15 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Religious people can fire gay people for being gay. Gay people can't fire religious people for being religious [Federal Civil Rights Act]. Talk about "special rights". Just more hypocrisy as usual. It will be interesting once a religious person denies/fires another religious person of a different persuasion. If it makes you feel any better I think employers should be able to fire employees for any reason they want. It's the employers money, .gov shouldn't tell them how to spend it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 9:09:43 AM EDT
[#44]
OP is a bot?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 9:15:15 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So can I refuse to make a cake for, say, a pinko based on the fact that I just don't fucking like them? And they don't have to serve you because you're part of the cis normative heterocage. Which is exactly how it should be. The law and gov shouldn't be able to force you to provide services to anyone you don't want to serve. A free market will crush those whom society deems as too discriminatory. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 9:16:42 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The bottom line is simple - if the goverment is discriminating against gays, or a person of some religion, or whatever, THAT is a constitutional issue. If it is a business or a person doing so, it's not. Businesses and individual people should be able to do business with whomever they choose, and refuse to do business with anyone they choose. THAT is freedom. I don't want a government telling me who I MUST associate with. Sir, I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 9:36:11 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What if you had a cake business and took the order for the gay cake, then your religiously inclined employee asserted their free association rights ....? Keep employee, do cake yourself, fire employee for whatever? Target made "reasonable accommodations" for Muslim cashiers who didn't want to handle Pork. This isn't really a new thing, nor typically that big a deal. Also, if you fire the employee for religious views than you've violated the EEOC regs. Which is another BS liberal law, imo, but here we are. Of course, since it's a liberal law, I happily use it to my own advantage as hard as I can. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 9:55:01 AM EDT
[#48]
This is how homosexuality started its climb to acceptance.
Wait till pedo's want their rights too. Where does it all end?? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/01/dsm-pedophilia-mental-disorder-paraphilia_n_4184878.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 9:55:14 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Businesses and individual people should be able to do business with whomever they choose, and refuse to do business with anyone they choose. THAT is freedom. I don't want a government telling me who I MUST associate with. That's how it worked until the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The Feds first tried to force all restaurants and motels to serve "whoever came to the door" (i.e., "black folks") under the Constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce. So mom and pop restaurants and motels in the South posted big signs saying, "We do not serve interstate travelers." But along came LBJ and the Civil Rights Act taking control of all businesses without regard for personal property rights . . . and the rest (as they say) is history. Question: In 1964, who would have ever thought that the Federal government would force a local bakery to make a wedding cake with 2 gay guy dolls on top? Answer: Everybody who understood how the Federal government and liberals work. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 10:07:00 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And they don't have to serve you because you're part of the cis normative heterocage. Which is exactly how it should be. The law and gov shouldn't be able to force you to provide services to anyone you don't want to serve. A free market will crush those whom society deems as too discriminatory. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So can I refuse to make a cake for, say, a pinko based on the fact that I just don't fucking like them? And they don't have to serve you because you're part of the cis normative heterocage. Which is exactly how it should be. The law and gov shouldn't be able to force you to provide services to anyone you don't want to serve. A free market will crush those whom society deems as too discriminatory. What will it do to those who are just discriminatory enough? What will it do to those discriminated against? |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
