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.
Wait, there are LAWS??? that impose penalties if a pharmacist discriminates who he sells products to??????
OMG!!! He could lose his license to do business?????? And you're OKAY with this?????? OMG!!!!!
There are roughly 30 states without laws protecting gays from discrimination. Do you happen to have any stas re the number of gays who've died, been hospitalized, or were refused meds by pharmacists in those states ? It must be in the hundreds or thousands !!!! OMG !!!!
Just imagine the numbers before Any states had anti-discrimination laws. There must have been a national calamity of untreated gay people, hidden by the media and hateful health officials
I'm glad to hear you say that, because it isn't clear to me.
Despite me saying many times that I think the baker was wrong?
Quote:
Apparently you think that until people like Connor are stopped by voluntary public backlash, the rest of us, in the form of our duly elected government, should stand by and just wait for the situation to resolve itself?
No, I see a difference in public actions and private ones. Should a city bus line be able to discriminate on who they pick up? No they should not be able to. The Constitution requires the government to treat everyone the same. It's why the Supreme Court will side with allowing gay marriage. I absolutely agree with that.
Individuals should not be held under the same constraints. One is forcing the government to live by the Constitution. The other is making a law against someone offending you.
"I know abolitionists don't like the Fugitive Slave Act but it is the law of the land." "I know civil rights advocates don't like Jim Crow but it is the law of the land." "I know Jews don't like concentration camps or Nazi policy, but it is the law of the land."
And since pizza joints are "public accommodations" and the public is essence the true owner of the parlor...when am I going to see my cut of the profits from Papa John's?
There are plenty of laws that have been judged to be unfair. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 seems to have stood the test of time, however.
It depends. Do I see a difference in life saving actions and baking one a cake? Yes, I would hope you would also.
Do I think an ambulance should be able to decide to not take the passenger of a car because they are black? No. Do I think there should be laws to save you from being offended? No.
I see that difference, too. And I've been castigated in other threads because I've argued that wedding cakes are artistic creations, and that the artist should have more say over such creations. I still think that an artist should have control over his artistic product. But I also recognize that there is a difference between a Rodin sculpture and a meal at a 4-star restaurant. One of them is a product for consumption. A cake is a product for consumption. And in that sense, the artistic product of Matisse is different than the product of Sweet Cakes. And Matisse's product, a product meant to last generations, means that Matisse has a larger interest in what happens with his product. Sweet Cakes product is to be eaten. To be eaten by the wedding party and the couple's guests. Sweet Cakes has no interest in who those guests are. Sweet Cakes isn't a guest. Sweet Cakes isn't an officiant. Sweet Cakes most likely won't be present at the wedding or at the reception (which are two different things). Sweet Cakes isn't participating. They are simply selling a cake. If they can't make the cake because they lack the artistry or skill, that's one thing. But refusing to make the cake because they have a moral conflict? What moral conflict? Do they bake cakes or don't they? Do they sell the cakes to the general public or don't they? If they do bake cakes and sell them to the general public, and gay couples are part of the general public, then sell the darn cake! Don't impose morality tests. The morality of their customers is not the business of a baker.
Businesses can and do systematically persecute. When a country club refuses admission to blacks, that's systematic persecution.
No it is not. You don't understand "systematic persecution" do you? Being denied entry onto private property is not "persecution" nor is it "systematic."
Quote:
Our government doesn't have a monopoly on force in our society, but it certainly can pose a strong force in our society. The public at large can also pose a strong force in our society. I haven't stated anything about magical powers or anything about good and betterment. That's you, putting words into my mouth, in an attempt to marginalize my remarks. A sign of someone with a weak argument.
Yes, the government DOES have the monopoly on force. It is the only entity that can roll up on a pizza parlor and force them to sell to someone they do not want to. They are the only entity that can legally detain and imprison you. They are the only entity that can carry out the death penalty, or wage war. If you do not agree try and imprison someone or force a business to sell to you at gun point and see what happens.
Quote:
As for the rest of your rant, save your insults for someone who cares about your opinion. If you have an argument, make it.
It is hard to argue with someone who does not understand basic ideas like "systematic persecution" or "monopoly of force" and resorts to a lot of question marks and exclamation points to make "points."
I see that difference, too. And I've been castigated in other threads because I've argued that wedding cakes are artistic creations, and that the artist should have more say over such creations. I still think that an artist should have control over his artistic product.
Fair enough.
Quote:
But I also recognize that there is a difference between a Rodin sculpture and a meal at a 4-star restaurant. One of them is a product for consumption. A cake is a product for consumption. And in that sense, the artistic product of Matisse is different than the product of Sweet Cakes. And Matisse's product, a product meant to last generations, means that Matisse has a larger interest in what happens with his product. Sweet Cakes product is to be eaten. To be eaten by the wedding party and the couple's guests. Sweet Cakes has no interest in who those guests are. Sweet Cakes isn't a guest. Sweet Cakes isn't an officiant. Sweet Cakes most likely won't be present at the wedding or at the reception (which are two different things). Sweet Cakes isn't participating. They are simply selling a cake. If they can't make the cake because they lack the artistry or skill, that's one thing. But refusing to make the cake because they have a moral conflict? What moral conflict? Do they bake cakes or don't they? Do they sell the cakes to the general public or don't they? If they do bake cakes and sell them to the general public, and gay couples are part of the general public, then sell the darn cake! Don't impose morality tests. The morality of their customers is not the business of a baker.
But this is the problem with discrimination laws. They are discriminatory. Breaking your argument down in simplistic terms you are saying it's o.k. for some to discriminate but not for others. How does one decide this artistic creating is worthy of protection but not that?
Once again though.....I am NOT arguing that I think the arguments made by the bakers are worth a hill of beans. I don't. I just don't think that everytime someone is wrong that there should be a law.
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.
