Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-23-2011, 06:26 PM
 
Location: The Woods
18,358 posts, read 26,507,138 times
Reputation: 11351

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by hammertime33 View Post
Um, do you have a poll on this incident?

A large majority of people support anti-discrimination laws as applied to places of public accommodation. Every single state, as well as the feds, have such a law and have for 5 or so decades.

Many states have added "sexual orientation" to their state law - the first to do so was Wisconsin in 1982. Vermont added sexual orientation in 1992 with overwhelming public support. I doubt that support has weakened in the last 19 years.

Pennsylvania is the next state poised add sexual orientation to it's law. A bill to do so is currently working its way through the process. Public polls show about 70% of Pennsylvanians favor this. Here are the states that have the same law as Vermont covering sexual orientation in its public accommodation anti-discrimination law:

California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Hawaii
Illinois
Iowa
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Minnesota
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
Oregon
Rhode Island
Vermont
Washington
Wisconsin
One can frequently gauge opinion by the comments/responses on local press websites.

Homosexuals' rights don't trump another's right to religion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-24-2011, 01:49 AM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,391,265 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by NY Jew View Post
if we change 1 more seat to the rational side of the court that decision will be overturned so my fantasy may be law soon.

Not to mention the fact that with the lefts "foreign policy expertise" we may have those law back again soon with a death penalty.
You want the death penalty for gay people?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2011, 02:06 AM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,391,265 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammertime33 View Post
Keep in mind they weren't getting married there - just having the after wedding reception.


Also, I just came across some new information about the specifics of this case that will put to rest some of the accusations that these lesbians were out to get this good Christian couple and looking to push an agenda. It turns out they didn't even initially contact this inn. The inn contacted them and asked for their business, only later to say sorry, no gays allowed:



"On October 20, 2010, Channie contacted the Vermont Convention Bureau (VCB) outlining her needs for a place to host the reception. The VCB sent information about Channie’s search to its membership list the next day. One of the businesses on VCB’s membership list is the Wildflower Inn in Lyndonville, VT. On October 29, the Wildflower Inn contacted Channie, indicating that the inn would be the 'perfect location' to host their reception after the wedding.

On November 5, Channie spoke by telephone with a representative of the Wildflower Inn to discuss details about planning the reception. During the conversation, the Wildflower Inn employee made a reference to 'the bride and groom,' and Channie clarified that the reception would involve two brides.

Within a few minutes after she got off the phone, Channie received an email from the Wildflower Inn employee with the subject heading 'bad news,' which informed her that Kate and Ming were not welcome at the Wildflower Inn.

The email read in part: 'After our conversation, I checked in with my Innkeepers and unfortunately due to their personal feelings, they do not host gay receptions at our facility.'”

The Wildflower Inn is a multi-room country resort that offers a variety of recreational opportunities and vacation packages. Their website claims that they are the 'Four Seasons for Everyone.' But apparently 'everyone' did not include Kate and Ming."



Baker and Linsley v. Wildflower Inn | American Civil Liberties Union
Good find!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2011, 02:09 AM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,391,265 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yooperkat View Post
The lesson here is that if you own a resort in Vermont and you don't want gays using it....you're just screwed. Resort owners are held hostage by women who like women, or men who like men.

So much for freedom.
The lesson here is that if you own a resort in Vermont and you don't want straights using it....you're just screwed. Resort owners cannot discriminate against women who like men, or men who like woman.

Your civil rights at work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2011, 06:23 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,519,997 times
Reputation: 27720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaymax View Post
The lesson here is that if you own a resort in Vermont and you don't want straights using it....you're just screwed. Resort owners cannot discriminate against women who like men, or men who like woman.

Your civil rights at work.
That could be an inn owed by an atheist who won't allow any marriages to be held there for any combination of genders.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2011, 06:46 AM
 
3,550 posts, read 2,558,089 times
Reputation: 477
Quote:
Not to mention the fact that with the lefts "foreign policy expertise" we may have those law back again soon with a death penalty.
Quote:
You want the death penalty for gay people?
I doubt I would be there at the time execution. (in case you have no clue what I'm saying with the left winger's foreign policy this country will be Muslim eventually)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2011, 07:54 AM
 
Location: Las Vegas, NV
3,849 posts, read 3,754,125 times
Reputation: 1706
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
One can frequently gauge opinion by the comments/responses on local press websites.

Homosexuals' rights don't trump another's right to religion.
No one said it does. But you seem to be claiming that religious freedom should trump the rights of homosexuals or anyone else who doesn't share the religious beliefs of these innkeepers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2011, 08:01 AM
 
Location: Las Vegas, NV
3,849 posts, read 3,754,125 times
Reputation: 1706
Quote:
Originally Posted by NY Jew View Post
I doubt I would be there at the time execution. (in case you have no clue what I'm saying with the left winger's foreign policy this country will be Muslim eventually)
That has got to be one of the dumbest things I've seen posted in a long time. I'm not 'up' on foreign policy, but could you point to specifics?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2011, 10:43 AM
 
1,800 posts, read 3,914,563 times
Reputation: 888
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
The democrats have run this state like their private kingdom for years now. A handful of cities/towns run the state. The courts have been packed full of people who tote their line. There were some fishy things happening in the last election as with many others, but nothing ever comes of it. Outside money comes in by the millions to support lawsuits to further radical agendas.

Some of our "leaders" who created these laws are so popular one of their cars was acquired and burned in the capitol in a demonstration years ago.
How is organizing to change laws radical?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2011, 11:50 AM
 
Location: Vermont
11,761 posts, read 14,661,252 times
Reputation: 18534
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
A handful of cities/towns run the state.
This is just a bogus claim, but I assume you're talking about the fact that in Vermont, as in the rest of the country, we now have one person-one vote, so more populated areas have more votes in the Legislature.


Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
There were some fishy things happening in the last election as with many others, but nothing ever comes of it.
Evidence, please?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:44 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top