Law says different: Gay hairstylist refusing service to anti-gay governor (poll, vote)

[aedubber]

See how these gays act? Throwing a little rainbow hissy fit about a law protecting religion but now denying service to someone because of a political view.

Seriously , find another planet to live on to play with your unicorns.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by jjrose

Yes I did, BECAUSE the state includes sexual orientation in their anti discrimination laws.

At the point that blacks were refused service I would have been fighting to get the laws changed, just like I am fighting to have them changed now in places that do not include sexual orientation in their anti discrimination laws.

And what gives the states the right to decide who businesses have to allow in their private property?

And because many state laws dont say you cant kick out gays, you'd be all find if a business kicked out gays?

[jjrose]

Originally Posted by pghquest

So the hairstylist refused service to others who are anti gay? Did he submit a questionaire prior to cutting peoples hair?

lets go with your argument, just for the sake of seeing you flip flop again.

Most of the country there are not laws which protect gays from discrimination..

So if asked to leave businesses, you as a gay individual, would do so and not have a problem with it?

Did the hairdresser ASK the governor her views, or were they commonly known?
If he did not ASK her, then he doesn't have to ask anyone else.

I have been asked to leave a business, and I did leave. I then started working to get the anti discrimination laws changed in my state.

Please show me where I have flip flopped, including quotes, because I haven't.

[jjrose]

Originally Posted by Tall Traveler

Funny how such hypocrites the gay supporters are. The same people that want to force Arizona businesses to serve gays if they object to doing so are perfectly okay with a gay person not serving a straight person....shame on all of you!

I'm consistent, you should have the right to serve or not serve who you want if you have a business...and suffer the consequences of your decision.

Again, the governor was not refused service based on her sexual orientation, she was refused service based on her political views which is not protected under New Mexico law.

[jjrose]

Originally Posted by pghquest

And what gives the states the right to decide who businesses have to allow in their private property?

And because many state laws dont say you cant kick out gays, you'd be all find if a business kicked out gays?

I HAVE been kicked out of a business. I did not sue the business. I started fighting to have sexual orientation included in the anti discrimination laws of my state.

Maybe if you started actually READING what is written, instead of putting words in my mouth, you would understand what I am saying.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by jjrose

Did the hairdresser ASK the governor her views, or were they commonly known?
If he did not ASK her, then he doesn't have to ask anyone else.

So its possible that the hair cutter cut peoples hair that didnt agree with gay marriage, which of course means the hair cutting didnt apply their standards evenly, did they?

Originally Posted by jjrose

I have been asked to leave a business, and I did leave. I then started working to get the anti discrimination laws changed in my state.

So you werent ok with it, were you?

Originally Posted by jjrose

Please show me where I have flip flopped, including quotes, because I haven't.

Did you think the gays should have gotten their cake or not? Even if the law didnt exist? Clearly you demand services be given to gays, you just stated you went to try to change the laws.

So its ok for gays to deny services to non gays, but not ok for non gays to deny services to gays, and support laws which demand it, there is your flip flopping

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by jjrose

I HAVE been kicked out of a business. I did not sue the business. I started fighting to have sexual orientation included in the anti discrimination laws of my state.

Maybe if you started actually READING what is written, instead of putting words in my mouth, you would understand what I am saying.

You didnt address anything I posted, did you?

[jjrose]

Originally Posted by pghquest

So its possible that the hair cutter cut peoples hair that didnt agree with gay marriage, which of course means the hair cutting didnt apply their standards evenly, did they?

Did anyone else make their views public knowledge, and then were served?

Originally Posted by pghquest

So you werent ok with it, were you?

I work WITHIN the existin laws, while trying to get them changed. Just like most people.

Originally Posted by pghquest

Did you think the gays should have gotten their cake or not? Even if the law didnt exist? Clearly you demand services be given to gays, you just stated you went to try to change the laws.

Yes, they should have gotten the cake, because the business is BREAKING THE LAW. If there was no inclusion of sexual orientation in those states, then the couples would have had no legal recourse except to do what millions of us are doing across the nation, and work to change the laws.

Originally Posted by pghquest

So its ok for gays to deny services to non gays, but not ok for non gays to deny services to gays..

The governor was not refused service based on her sexual orientation.

[hammertime33]

Originally Posted by summers73

Sexual preference isn't a protected class either, yet the law disagrees. If it were, he is straight so you cannot refuse on the basis of being straight.

Sexual orientation IS a protected class in New Mexico.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by jjrose

Did anyone else make their views public knowledge, and then were served?

Chick Filet didnt deny services to gays, but that didnt stop left wing kooks from throwing a temper tantrum, did it? Werent they being served?

Originally Posted by jjrose

I work WITHIN the existin laws, while trying to get them changed. Just like most people.

Did you fight to change the laws so gays cant discriminate against non gays? I bet you didnt..

Originally Posted by jjrose

Yes, they should have gotten the cake, because the business is BREAKING THE LAW. If there was no inclusion of sexual orientation in those states, then the couples would have had no legal recourse except to do what millions of us are doing across the nation, and work to change the laws

But you didnt address the question, lacking a law, should a gay receive a cake when they order one?

Originally Posted by jjrose

The governor was not refused service based on her sexual orientation.

Immaterial standard..

They could have been refused service for wearing a Steeler shirt for all it matters.

Either its ok to demand people be serviced at a business open to the public, or private property rights hold superior laws and the owner gets to decide. You cant have it both ways without being hypocritical.