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.
No Christian nurse is going to refuse to give a homosexual a flu shot.
Fail!
Probably not, but you'd be surprised how far some people take these things! We had a librarian at my old library who was very religious (Christian), and refused to touch any of the Harry Potter books... because in her mind they promoted witchcraft, and even touching them might cause "evil" to rub off on her. Seriously.
In that case she was allowed to get away with this behavior, since she never kept them from being made available to the public - she simply had the other librarians process those books, which happens long before they even hit the public floor. But still, I was flabbergasted to hear about this lady (who I was actually replacing after she retired).
... There is a whole different thread discussing that issue, and explaining how she wasn't refused service for being straight - she was refused based on personal/political beliefs, likely to make a retaliatory point. Since Arizona doesn't include "political beliefs" as a protected class category, the comparison is moot. Not that I agree with either of these acts, just saying you cannot compare the two legally.
Now, if they had turned her away because "her being straight goes against our beliefs," that would be a valid example of hypocrisy... but since I'm sure they cut the hair of other straight people, it is clearly not her sexual orientation which made them refuse her request. Got anything else?
Just my opinion: the hair stylist should not refuse to style the governor's hair because of her political stance.
He did her hair in the past, and he should continue to accept her patronage. However, while doing her hair he should exercise his free speech rights and try to persuade her to change her position.
Maybe, maybe not. I don't know these specific business owners, so for all we know they WOULD refuse a non-wedding request from a gay person. Basically it comes down to whether they're refusing a product vs a person... and if it's the person they won't serve, based solely on their orientation etc, that is when it becomes discrimination. Also, they cannot provide a specific product/service to one group of people but not another. Take the kosher cake example I gave above, where they can refuse to bake anything with non-kosher ingredients, but have to sell the kosher products to anyone - Jewish or gentile.
There is a whole different thread discussing that issue, and explaining how she wasn't refused service for being straight - she was refused based on personal/political beliefs, likely to make a retaliatory point. Since Arizona doesn't include "political beliefs" as a protected class category, the comparison is moot. Not that I agree with either of these acts, just saying you cannot compare the two legally.
Now, if they had turned her away because "her being straight goes against our beliefs," that would be a valid example of hypocrisy... but since I'm sure they cut the hair of other straight people, it is clearly not her sexual orientation which made them refuse her request. Got anything else?
To the Christian baker, a wedding cake with two male figurines on top would definitely be "non-Kosher", but we already know homosexuals can buy anything the Christian bakery makes any time they like.
What the homosexual activists wanted was to force a Christian baker to participate in their same-sex wedding knowing the baker would find it morally repugnant.
I wonder how a Jewish deli owner would feel about delivering smoked chub to an uncut goy's Bar Mitzvah.
"There is a whole different thread discussing that issue, and explaining how she wasn't refused service for being straight - she was refused based on personal/political beliefs, likely to make a retaliatory point"
The gay couple wasn't refused service because they were gay.
A couple seeking a cake for a same-sex wedding was refused a cake for a same-sex wedding because the baker didn't make cakes for same sex weddings.
To the Christian baker, a wedding cake with two male figurines on top would definitely be "non-Kosher", but we already know homosexuals can buy anything the Christian bakery makes any time they like.
What the homosexual activists wanted was to force a Christian baker to participate in their same-sex wedding knowing the baker would find it morally repugnant.
I wonder how a Jewish deli owner would feel about delivering smoked chub to an uncut goy's Bar Mitzvah.
"There is a whole different thread discussing that issue, and explaining how she wasn't refused service for being straight - she was refused based on personal/political beliefs, likely to make a retaliatory point"
The gay couple wasn't refused service because they were gay.
A couple seeking a cake for a same-sex wedding was refused a cake for a same-sex wedding because the baker didn't make cakes for same sex weddings.
Figurines on top of a wedding cake is so oldies, the weddings I have been to typically don't have figurines on top of the cake, though my wife and I did have a little bride and groom lego figures because legos are awesome.
A baker refusing to make a wedding cake because they don't want to sell to a gay couple is refusing service to someone for being gay, which is illegal.
To the Christian baker, a wedding cake with two male figurines on top would definitely be "non-Kosher", but we already know homosexuals can buy anything the Christian bakery makes any time they like.
Hardly anyone uses cake toppers anymore, so what if the gay couple asked for a simple cake like this?
If they made that SAME EXACT cake for a straight couple, would you agree they can refuse to make it for a gay couple?
Quote:
What the homosexual activists wanted was to force a Christian baker to participate in their same-sex wedding knowing the baker would find it morally repugnant.
I've been to a ton of weddings, and not once has the baker "participated" in the wedding... usually the couple doesn't even acknowledge who made the cake, unless a guest specifically asks them. As for the baker finding it "morally repugnant," that still doesn't trump the laws.
Now, I will agree that it's possible they (not just in that specific case) did it to make a point - but since I think it is a good point, I have a hard time faulting them for bringing this to our attention. Shouldn't we know if public-serving businesses are violating the law, or do you think we should silently turn the other cheek?
Quote:
I wonder how a Jewish deli owner would feel about delivering smoked chub to an uncut goy's Bar Mitzvah.
1. An "uncut goy" wouldn't be having a Bar/Bat Mitzvah, at least not in any real synagogue. Maybe an uncut Jew, but a "goy" would be prohibited from having such a ceremony - seeing as it is a passage into JUDAISM, just as being Baptized is restricted to Baptists/Christians.
2. I had to look up what a smoked chub was, and it appears to be a fish... if that is a kosher meal, then a kosher caterer would likely have no problem delivering it to anyone's celebration. I'm sure the Jewish bakers and caterers around the country serve non-Jewish parties all the time, provided they aren't asked to cook anything non-kosher like pork. Again, they ARE allowed to pick & choose which products to provide; they just can't pick & choose WHO is allowed to buy them.
Quote:
The gay couple wasn't refused service because they were gay.
A couple seeking a cake for a same-sex wedding was refused a cake for a same-sex wedding because the baker didn't make cakes for same sex weddings.
See, this is where it gets fuzzy for me... I guess you'd have to explain how a same sex wedding differed from a straight wedding, in terms of what services and products they provided. Let's say they ordered off the stock catering menu, and commissioned a cake that was an exact copy of one from their portfolio. THEN would you agree it was a case of discrimination, since it would only be the people involved stopping them from accepting the job?
The marrying couple typically saves the figurines as a keep sake.
Most wedding cakes do not even have figurines on top anymore, and those that do typically order their own toppers instead of using the cookie cutter ones from the bakery.
Most wedding cakes do not even have figurines on top anymore, and those that do typically order their own toppers instead of using the cookie cutter ones from the bakery.
Seriously, who would want a cheap throw away cake topper from a bakery, I would want one that was sentimental.
What if someone planning a wedding ceremony for a gay couple lies to the baker by requesting a cake be made for Tom and Mary's wedding. Days later, the baker gets praised for the fabulous cake he made for Tom and Dave's wedding. Should the baker have the right to file a lawsuit, or should the judge throw out the lawsuit as frivolous?
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.
