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 02-27-2015, 11:52 AM
 
15,632 posts, read 26,122,878 times
Reputation: 30912

Advertisements

This is so ridiculous. There's ways you don't have to do things you don't want to do when you're in business. We "discriminate" in our business. We no longer service properties with bathrooms. Bathrooms are a huge pain, people are gross and community bathrooms are like free for alls.

SO -- when we get asked to bid on a place and we find out it has bathrooms, we bid it up high enough that we won't get hired. Not so much that we won't get asked to bid on a more desireable property, though. If we know the management company we also tell them we don't want bathrooms anymore, but sometimes property management companies occasionally call up out of the blue.

So all that woman had to do (and people price shop for wedding flowers) is run her bid up. But no -- she had to open her big yap and tell people how stupid she was....

She's going to hold onto her right to free speech right till she closes her business.... just dumb.

 
Old 02-27-2015, 11:55 AM
 
Location: H-Tine, Texas
6,732 posts, read 5,142,010 times
Reputation: 8539
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
So no reply? Hard to show she is not cherry picking sinners to deny services to when the facts are put before you huh?
Yup, I presented that same scenario to her earlier and of course, the poster ignored it.

Ironic the poster has such an issue with laws wanting consistency in business owners' practices (religious or non religious), but that same level of consistency isn't required when business owners are exercising their religious beliefs on potential customers.

And here I thought there was no hierarchy of sin, that no sin was greater than another.

Makes sense.
 
Old 02-27-2015, 11:56 AM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,261 posts, read 14,115,947 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by loriinwa View Post
No I didn't. Perhaps your problem is reading comprehension. I have said that the 1st Amendment protects citizens' right to freely exercise their religion by prohibiting the legislation of laws that would deny that right. In this instance, WA State has enacted a law in conflict with the Constitutionally guaranteed right of the florist to exercise her religious freedom. That is the reason this is going through the court system...to litigate the Constitutionality of the law.

Your uninformed opinion is that state law giving special privileges to a select victim class overrides the Constitutional guarantees of the 1st Amendment.

I disagree with you.
Do you believe that any law that abridges any religious belief is unconstitutional?
 
Old 02-27-2015, 11:59 AM
 
920 posts, read 628,802 times
Reputation: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolf39us View Post
I'll answer here.





It's there in the quoted section.


Here is the 1st commandment with the associated punishments.

Those sections have to do with laws and punishment for sins. She is not being sued because she exacted any punishment upon these customers. My understanding is that Jesus did not command his followers to mete out punishments to those who commit sins, but pray for them to repent and accept the word of God as holy. But I'm not a Christian, so I cannot speak with certainty to that.

Can't help you with the New Testament, since Judaism permits divorce and I am Jewish.

Regardless, your argument was that she cherry picked her beliefs, and you have failed to produce any proofs to support your allegation. Until you do so, your argument is false and libelous, at that.
 
Old 02-27-2015, 12:00 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
13,520 posts, read 22,009,600 times
Reputation: 20234
 
Old 02-27-2015, 12:01 PM
 
18,044 posts, read 25,080,159 times
Reputation: 16726
Quote:
Originally Posted by AL84 View Post
She did not discriminate. She followed her lawful right to her religion.
Are you serious?
Because the Bible supports slavery and stoning people
 
Old 02-27-2015, 12:02 PM
 
920 posts, read 628,802 times
Reputation: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallysmom View Post
This is so ridiculous. There's ways you don't have to do things you don't want to do when you're in business. We "discriminate" in our business. We no longer service properties with bathrooms. Bathrooms are a huge pain, people are gross and community bathrooms are like free for alls.

SO -- when we get asked to bid on a place and we find out it has bathrooms, we bid it up high enough that we won't get hired. Not so much that we won't get asked to bid on a more desireable property, though. If we know the management company we also tell them we don't want bathrooms anymore, but sometimes property management companies occasionally call up out of the blue.

So all that woman had to do (and people price shop for wedding flowers) is run her bid up. But no -- she had to open her big yap and tell people how stupid she was....

She's going to hold onto her right to free speech right till she closes her business.... just dumb.
It is not a right to free speech she is defending, it is her right to the free exercise of her religion. I guess her honesty is seen as stupidity to some people, but then again, honesty is a virtue and those who oppose her rights seem not to hold virtues in any esteem.
 
Old 02-27-2015, 12:06 PM
 
920 posts, read 628,802 times
Reputation: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopo View Post
Are you serious?
Because the Bible supports slavery and stoning people
Non-sequitur - FAIL
 
Old 02-27-2015, 12:18 PM
 
Location: Seymour, CT
3,639 posts, read 3,315,285 times
Reputation: 3089
Quote:
Originally Posted by loriinwa View Post
Those sections have to do with laws and punishment for sins. She is not being sued because she exacted any punishment upon these customers. My understanding is that Jesus did not command his followers to mete out punishments to those who commit sins, but pray for them to repent and accept the word of God as holy. But I'm not a Christian, so I cannot speak with certainty to that.

Can't help you with the New Testament, since Judaism permits divorce and I am Jewish.

Regardless, your argument was that she cherry picked her beliefs, and you have failed to produce any proofs to support your allegation. Until you do so, your argument is false and libelous, at that.
LOL Are you serious?

I just pointed to you the quotes in the bible that you asked for. This is exactly the same book that she uses to invoke her religion. No what the punishment is for gay sex? Same stuff!

Where in the bible does it say that she can't sell flowers to them for a wedding?
Answer: no where!

She is not selling them because homosexual weddings are an abomination of the god of the bible. Well, so are non-virgin females getting married. So is divorce, etc etc.

You can attempt to say that I provided nothing, but I provided exactly what you asked for and am using 1:1 logic applying exactly the same standards that she uses to determine why selling flowers to homosexuals for a gay wedding is against her beliefs.

The bible is not an authority, and her religious beliefs do not trump law. If they did, then we would have a theocracy. The 1st amendment doesn't override anti-discrimination laws.
 
Old 02-27-2015, 12:27 PM
 
11,186 posts, read 6,464,622 times
Reputation: 4619
Quote:
Originally Posted by loriinwa View Post
No I didn't. Perhaps your problem is reading comprehension. I have said that the 1st Amendment protects citizens' right to freely exercise their religion by prohibiting the legislation of laws that would deny that right. In this instance, WA State has enacted a law in conflict with the Constitutionally guaranteed right of the florist to exercise her religious freedom. That is the reason this is going through the court system...to litigate the Constitutionality of the law.

Your uninformed opinion is that state law giving special privileges to a select victim class overrides the Constitutional guarantees of the 1st Amendment.

I disagree with you.
Regardless of your opinion, courts for decades, and recently in all the florist, baker, hotel cases re ssm don't agree with you.

I don't know if 'honesty is the best policy' is a sacred motto to business owners with moral objections to ssm. If it is, they're going to keep losing. They really need to come up with more creative ways to stop serving those events.
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.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 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