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.
While I get both sides of this argument the one thing I keep coming back to is when you open a business that's open to the public (key word there) then wouldn't one expect maybe,possibly a person or two (thousand) might come in that you don't like or don't agree with? If you don't want to serve "some" people then DON'T open a business that's open to the PUBLIC.
Simple no?
Extremely simple, and if the shoe were on the other foot (as it has been) you'd hear this exact argument from the anti-gays... of course, they never see or acknowledge their hypocrisies on this issue.
Brewer did the right thing. It is best for Arizona, which is what the governor should choose.
Shocking that even this Ted Baxter of governors gets one right, now and than. Ca-ching, big business is very pleased with her decision. The businesses that drive the economy, in a state that can ill afford to lose big chunks of market share/types of events, etc.
Selling goods and services to gay people violates religion? Where was that in the Bible?
If we couldn't sell goods or services to anyone who violated the Torah, my fellow Jewish people wouldn't dominate the jewelry/gold industry... and anyone who's been to NYC knows we do! That rule is not in the Bible, nor does it explicitly condemn homosexuality - the word doesn't even exist in Hebrew, but (some) modern Christians apparently think King James et al wrote the Bible's first edition. Not even close, lol.
As for our nation's "freedom of religion," that mostly just covers our freedom to worship, gather, and openly PRACTICE our religions. I don't consider selling goods to be a religious practice, in fact working or selling anything on the Sabbath is prohibited for observant Jews (and Christians?). You're all free to have a giant cross hanging over the door of your business, and you are also free to pray for a poor sinner's soul... heck, you are even free to quit that job if it "violates" your beliefs. But as long as you are working there, or running a public-serving business, you still have to follow the state's laws. Could you serve spoiled meats to customers if your religion believed it was safer? Or pee in the soup?
I'm a public librarian, and don't even have the right to deny entry to a neo-Nazi. Matter of fact, we had a few at my old library I'd help regularly - with a smile on my face, no less, as they were always very polite and respectful. It's my job, not synagogue, and they have the same rights to use the library as anyone else. Did they make my skin crawl? Absolutely, but my personal feelings do not trump their rights.
Well we can never accuse Apple, Google et cie, of not knowing how to get a cheap pop.
they're pretending to be the good guy for "standing up" to arizona.
While in truth they cowtow to the highly oppressive chinese government to run their factories for dirt wages, and have access to sell their goods in the chinese market
...no civil rights law exists to address discrimination or harassment on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The media tends to censor positive depictions of gay couples in films and television shows and households headed by same-sex couples are not permitted to adopt children and do not have the same privileges as heterosexual married couples.
If it's a gay Nazi or Black transvestite gender changer hitler youth then you HAVE to serve them.
Not if they aren't wearing a shirt & shoes, as those would be health code violations - just as I can kick out a gay person at the library if they're smoking, since that is a clear violation of our "guidelines for use." What I cannot do is kick them out for smoking, then turn around and allow a straight person to smoke. Only THEN would I be discriminating.
Quote:
The simple solution to not doing business with those you don't like is to crank up the price. I've seen that done many times. You want to buy that cake? Sure, that'll be $2000 please. I'd not act like that but if you're going to be picky please do so quietly so you don't color the whole business community as stupid.
I know this isn't your personal belief, but it sounds eerily like the way schools & businesses stealthily kept out non-whites back in the day. And people wonder why parallels are always drawn between gay rights & the civil rights movement? Also made me think of that scene from The Jerk - where they talk about jacking up prices on their rental properties, to keep out the "undesirables" (blacks). Love Martin's response, lol.
Far as I am concerned they are. If my business is not taking tax dollars from the government, it's none of their business to tell me who I can refuse service too.
But your opinion is not supported by the Supreme Court, so it really doesn't matter what you think.
The ONLY reason anyone would support this law is because they have a hatred for homosexuals. Other than that, there is no logical basis for anyone supporting it.
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.
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.
Shocking that even this Ted Baxter of governors gets one right, now and than. Ca-ching, big business is very pleased with her decision. The businesses that drive the economy, in a state that can ill afford to lose big chunks of market share/types of events, etc.
That rule is not in the Bible, nor does it explicitly condemn homosexuality - the word doesn't even exist in Hebrew, but (some) modern Christians apparently think King James et al wrote the Bible's first edition. Not even close, lol.
