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.
Over $400,000 as of right now donated by over 14,000 people in one day. That's quite a statement of support by the public. Guess what, people don't like it when bullies try to force them to do something against their personal beliefs, regardless of position on the issue of homosexual marriage (a separate issue).
Your post highlights the true nature of this entire debate.
Progressives, liberals, whatever you want to call us, are all about increasing the circle of inclusion and equality. It is what America has been about since it's foundation. "All Men Created Equal" ring a bell?
You represent the faction that wants to create exclusionary zones and mitigating circumstances in that "circle of equality". You want to isolate and separate certain segments of our society that you find personally offensive by using religion based legislation.
Doesn't anyone see how unproductive the policy of exclusion is to the general human condition? Liberty, Equality, Fraternity was the motto of the French revolution. As far as America, we've always been about expanding the circle of equality for all, since our foundation.
These laws are designed to change that dynamic. Texas has one in the works that is even more draconian.
Why not let businesses be allowed to say no to serving gay weddings and call it a day? Its not hard. No one is saying if you're gay, you cant come in my store. Its about the service requested.
What is next? Are churches going to be under fire next for not performing gay weddings? If businesses have to, is it crazy to think churches arent going to be targeted next?
1. As a landlord why can't I refuse to rent to a potential tenant who is Black or Hindu or handicapped or elderly? Yet (at least in my county) if I choose to discriminate ... even against gay folks ... I would be in BIG trouble. Very big trouble. I'm not going to denounce the public accommodation laws nor will I defend them. As a businessman I have to respect the law. That's all. It's a philosophical debate you're having and I think you should take it to the "Great Debates" Forum here at C-D.
Understand this: whether it's a Jew or an Albanian or an Albino or a Buddhist or a Lesbian or 75 year old old grandmother who wears sneakers - and I think this is true for most places in the US - if you refuse service to a paying customer you are not only breaking the law you are liable for a serious lawsuit.
2. In Massachusetts same sex marriage was legalized in 2003 and that went into effect in 2004. Roman Catholic Churches do not perform gay marriage. In the past 11 years please show me where a Catholic church was forced to perform a gay wedding ceremony. Cite your sources, please.
Your post highlights the true nature of this entire debate.
Progressives, liberals, whatever you want to call us, are all about increasing the circle of inclusion and equality. It is what America has been about since it's foundation. "All Men Created Equal" ring a bell?
You represent the faction that wants to create exclusionary zones and mitigating circumstances in that "circle of equality". You want to isolate and separate certain segments of our society that you find personally offensive by using religion based legislation.
Doesn't anyone see how unproductive the policy of exclusion is to the general human condition? Liberty, Equality, Fraternity was the motto of the French revolution. As far as America, we've always been about expanding the circle of equality for all, since our foundation.
These laws are designed to change that dynamic. Texas has one in the works that is even more draconian.
You should read some history books. There is very little in history that suggests that America is about the federal government compelling private citizens to act contrary to their faith. The founding documents were about minimizing the element of force from the government on private citizens.
So a lot more restaurant owners around the country need to boast that they would show gays the door, if they walked in. Or at least that they wouldn't make anything for a gay wedding. Bigotry against gays pays big time!
Over $400,000 as of right now donated by over 14,000 people in one day. That's quite a statement of support by the public. Guess what, people don't like it when bullies try to force them to do something against their personal beliefs, regardless of position on the issue of homosexual marriage (a separate issue).
The same response, no doubt, would have happened in the 1960s, if the Internet was around, had a restaurant owner boast he didn't serve Blacks and no law should make him to do it.
You should read some history books. There is very little in history that suggests that America is about the federal government compelling private citizens to act contrary to their faith. The founding documents were about minimizing the element of force from the government on private citizens.
But during the 1960s a lot of people, especially in the South, believed God commanded in the Bible not to mix the races, but they were ignored and forced to accept Blacks against their will, most notably Gov. George Wallace of Alabama.
But during the 1960s a lot of people, especially in the South, believed God commanded in the Bible not to mix the races, but they were ignored and forced to accept Blacks against their will, most notably Gov. George Wallace of Alabama.
You keep trotting out the same tired leftist rhetoric. When will you statists learn that freedom =/= segregation via governmental force? The problem with Jim Crow and forced segregation wasn't that people lived "segregated" it was that they were forced to do so and did not have freedom of association or true property rights.
Forced integration is no more moral than forced segregation despite the noble purpose behind it. The moral thing to do would have been to get the government out of our personal lives and remove barriers to freedom, not simply switch which hand the government holds the whip in. The same principle that allows for forced "tolerance" also allowed for Jim Crow and that is state force.
Endowed rights are protected by government.
"Constitutional rights" (privileges) are granted by government.
If there was no government, what would stop anyone from discriminating?
And how did an endowed right to choose one's customer become a government privilege?
License (civil liberty)?
Why do businesses need government permission (license)?
Your post highlights the true nature of this entire debate.
Progressives, liberals, whatever you want to call us, are all about increasing the circle of inclusion and equality. It is what America has been about since it's foundation. "All Men Created Equal" ring a bell?
You represent the faction that wants to create exclusionary zones and mitigating circumstances in that "circle of equality". You want to isolate and separate certain segments of our society that you find personally offensive by using religion based legislation.
Doesn't anyone see how unproductive the policy of exclusion is to the general human condition? Liberty, Equality, Fraternity was the motto of the French revolution. As far as America, we've always been about expanding the circle of equality for all, since our foundation.
These laws are designed to change that dynamic. Texas has one in the works that is even more draconian.
All of this is essentially meaningless because nothing you've said here is right. America was founded by a bunch of religious people who wanted to establish religious freedom and protect their right to practice their faith without interference from the state. I highly doubt many of the Founders would have a problem with the law in Indiana. I also don't imagine that early Americans were big on the "circle of equality" considering slavery was a norm, blacks were not considered people, they had no problem massacring American Indians and taking their land, and while they may have said "All men are created equal" I have a feeling Thomas Jefferson had a different concept of that idea than you do.
Secondly the idea of "liberty" that you are espousing is pretty much meaningless. Without freedom of association, vigorous property rights, religious freedom, and freedom of speech what "liberty" could you possibly be talking about? If I don't even have the right to remove someone from my property and refuse to engage in commerce with them how could I possibly have any meaningful liberty? If I don't truly own myself, if I cannot practice my religion how I see fit, conduct my affairs how I see fit on my property, so long as I do not violate someone else's rights then what is "liberty" but a buzzword to make the masses feel better about their slavery to the state.
Calling the Indiana law "draconian" is hysterical nonsense. No one is "isolating and separating" anyone, there is no force involved here. A man has the ability to refuse service to anyone on his property because that property is HIS, not yours or anyone else. It would be wrong and immoral for the government to say, "you have to refuse service to gays." That is different because that is the government using force to tell a person what to do on their property. It is no less immoral when the government tells you that you cannot refuse service to someone on your own property.
When this new law goes into effect in Indiana businesses will be able to refuse service to gays
How are they to determine the sexual orientation of any particular customer??
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.
