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.
So why no massive protest agains Apple, which sells products to those who execute homosexuals just for being homosexual? Where's the outrage? Why no boycott? Why the extreme liberal hypocrisy in Apple's case? Why is it OK for Apple to endorse the execution of homosexuals by specifically doing business with such people/governments, but it's not OK for others to merely turn business away when there are plenty of other choices for those turned away?
Which is worse? Execution... death? Or having to buy from another business?
What Countries does it sell to that execute homosexuals? People are usually more concerned with the rights they have in their own Country compared to what is happening in a far away land that they cannot affect. While it would be great to be rigid across the board it would pretty much limit your options. Since very few mobile phone manufactures are going to limit their markets. It's more important to recognize that there are limits to what you can achieve and spend your capital in areas where you can actually affect change.
There is a world of difference between being friends with someone and operating a business serving the public.
How can you even compare the two?
LOL, backing down? Now it's 'non-essential businesses'...ROLFMAO
I'm not backing down. Look at my earliest posts here or any related thread, and you'll clearly see I've ALWAYS said this.
Why have I always said this, because essential businesses provide a public need that is critical to society. There is a distinct purpose for forcing certain businesses to do business with everyone.
What is the distinct purpose, the public good, for forcing non-essential businesses to trade with people whom they do not want to associate?
If a business should become a legal entity, and take advantage of the resources made available to it by the general public, should the business then be required to serve the very people who provided them advantage? Why should I fund a business that discriminates against me because I'm me?
If you wish to take advantage of the general public, then you need to accommodate the general public. All of them.
When did Apple say they wouldn't sell to anyone that has money to buy their product?
Why support those who specifically choose to do business with people/countries who execute homosexuals?
If anyone complaining about Indiana's law had any integrity, they'd boycott Apple. So... where's the boycott? Why is Apple the leading smartphone seller in the U.S. given their atrocious human rights business record?
What Countries does it sell to that execute homosexuals? People are usually more concerned with the rights they have in their own Country compared to what is happening in a far away land that they cannot affect.
Many ME Muslim countries. And since when do boycotts have no effect? And if you truly believe that, why are liberals always boycotting one thing or another? Is it just liberals' stupidity?
Yes. All that is precisely my point. The same people that support refusing service to gay couples will freaky deaky the first moment a Muslim owned business pulls the same stunt with them.
I actually have no problem with people coming out of the closet and being as open as they like about who they think is fit to be a customer and who isn't. It's a lot less insidious than "sorry we're too busy".
Discrimination happens all the time, regardless of the law. No you can't officially refuse to rent to a black family, but you can tell them the apartment's taken. It's idiot people trying to make a point of their discriminatory practices that come to light with these cases. I'd rather know who I'm dealing with, so I say bleat it from the rooftops, so I know not to patronize the business that you are free to run how you see fit.
I would have no problems at all if a small family owned Muslim business refused to serve gays or Christian girls dressed in midriff baring tops and hot pants. If they are truly offended by these sorts of people because of their religious beliefs, then so what? In every town or city in America, there are many choices for consumers shopping for goods. And when running a business, it's really not all about the almighty dollar. With a small business, there is a maximum as to how much product output they can produce in a day or work week before needing to hire more people or work space. Not all businesses are greedy growing entities.
When I was selling on eBay, I blocked a couple of bidders from my auctions because I didn't like they way they behaved on the site. I even cancelled one person's bids once, even though it cost me money. Everyone needs to have integrity, a moral line that they won't cross. And if for some traditionally minded religious people that means that they don't accept the gay lifestyle or gay marriage, then so what? The younger generations are more open-minded anyway, so eventually there will be more gay tolerance in the decades to come. I don't see why gays can't have more patience.
I also don't see the need to bully or cyber bully these businesses to welcome gays. And who would want to hire a wedding photographer or baker who hates the idea of gay marriage? Instead, just seek out businesses who are positive about it and hire them instead. I thought that America was all about the freedom of choice.
Since when do boycotts have no effect? And if you truly believe that, why are liberals always boycotting one thing or another? Is it just liberals' stupidity?
Again, what Countries does it sell to that execute people for being gay? Boycotts work if they are large enough or sustained enough to keep up. It's also going to be nearly impossible because every major mobile phone manufacturer is going to sell to the same Countries or ones just like them.
The cons need to change their tune on this thread. Pence has come out saying that the reason for the law has nothing to do with homosexuals, but is because of Obamacare! Funny that no righties who have commented here or elsewhere have mentioned anything other than cakes and photography for gay weddings. Be that as it may, we need to get with the new narrative.
I'll start. Obamacare forced Indiana to pass this law. If Obamacare is repealed then the law can be repealed as well.
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.
