U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-02-2016, 01:24 PM
 
4,851 posts, read 2,133,809 times
Reputation: 1587

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by cupper3 View Post
The answer is simple.

What Spark Networks was doing was discriminatory and illegal. The complainants, I suspect, felt that whenever they see such illegal and discriminatory activity, that it needs to be called out, as opposed to be acquiescenced to by silence. That would only encourage other such illegal and discriminatory activity by other organizations or corporations.

Either one believes a principal needs to be adhered to or not. There is no "almost pregnant" middle ground.


If you wish to pretend this , and not recognize the vindictiveness , whatever works for you . I don't think you are being very honest with yourself though . You now have to convince yourself that not catering specifically TO gays is discrimination against them .

Your thoughts are an example of why I politically fear liberals in charge as much as I do right wing conservatives .
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-02-2016, 01:35 PM
 
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,463,675 times
Reputation: 4559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio View Post
No, it wasn't.
You are a better judge of the law than that judge? It's illegal, has been ruled that way, and Spark Networks is not fighting it any further, as they recognize they have to make the changes.


Quote:
So they decided to be offended needlessly?
It is not needless to continue to demand your rights be upheld. You know, like the NRA does with the 2nd Amendment. You don't see them ever being quiet on any minor law change, and for good reason, the slippery slope argument.

Same principal applies.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2016, 01:36 PM
 
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,463,675 times
Reputation: 4559
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallflash View Post
If you wish to pretend this , and not recognize the vindictiveness , whatever works for you . I don't think you are being very honest with yourself though . You now have to convince yourself that not catering specifically TO gays is discrimination against them .

Your thoughts are an example of why I politically fear liberals in charge as much as I do right wing conservatives .
As I stated above to Vizio, it is the same principal as why the NRA continuously fights firearm restrictions.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2016, 01:38 PM
 
19,943 posts, read 16,259,780 times
Reputation: 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by cupper3 View Post
You are a better judge of the law than that judge? It's illegal, has been ruled that way, and Spark Networks is not fighting it any further, as they recognize they have to make the changes.
Yes. Our courts are full of judges that have no clue what the Constituion actually says.
Quote:


It is not needless to continue to demand your rights be upheld. You know, like the NRA does with the 2nd Amendment. You don't see them ever being quiet on any minor law change, and for good reason, the slippery slope argument.

Same principal applies.
If the only point is to cause issues for others it's needless.

Having said that, the Bill of Rights actually says that we have the right to bear arms. It's silent regarding gay people.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2016, 01:43 PM
 
4,851 posts, read 2,133,809 times
Reputation: 1587
Quote:
Originally Posted by cupper3 View Post
As I stated above to Vizio, it is the same principal as why the NRA continuously fights firearm restrictions.
No it's not . That a business capitulated, especially one that may not be , as you say, really Christian and have sincere religious objections , is beside the principle and motivation of the matter . In this case you are forcing a business to offer a service they previously didn't choose to offer, specifically because a couple of militant gays looking for a fight demanded it .

Do you not get this ?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2016, 01:53 PM
 
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,463,675 times
Reputation: 4559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio View Post
Yes. Our courts are full of judges that have no clue what the Constituion actually says.
Perhaps those that are elected, and not appointed. Not vetted for legal knowledge, but run on popularity. Yeah, I can see those being devoid of a great constitutional understanding. Thankfully, there are judges at higher levels who actually have to be screened, including Congressional hearings.

Quote:
If the only point is to cause issues for others it's needless.

Having said that, the Bill of Rights actually says that we have the right to bear arms. It's silent regarding gay people.
SCOTUS has ruled that the 14th Amendment applies to all, including gay right to marry. There are many SCOTUS and our own SCC decisions I don't agree with, but they are the law of the land. If you believe in due process and the supremacy of accepted law, one's option is to have either the constitution changed, or bring other laws inline with the constitution as interpreted by the senior judges.

To whine and snivel and complain and deny gets you nowhere. I have personally been involved in a Supreme Court of Canada decision involving the constitutionality of the government requiring firearms to be registered which was lost by our side. Didn't like it one bit. So myself, and many others, lobbied a political party to make it part of their platform to change that law. They got elected 10 years ago, and 8 years ago, changed the law so firearms (other than handguns) do not have be registered, and they ordered that the database and all copies be destroyed, so that no future government could use it.

That's how you deal with decisions you don't like. Can't get the support for a constitutional change? Maybe your case is not strong enough, and most people do not agree with you.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2016, 01:54 PM
 
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,463,675 times
Reputation: 4559
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallflash View Post
No it's not . That a business capitulated, especially one that may not be , as you say, really Christian and have sincere religious objections , is beside the principle and motivation of the matter . In this case you are forcing a business to offer a service they previously didn't choose to offer, specifically because a couple of militant gays looking for a fight demanded it .

Do you not get this ?
They illegally did not offer it. You need to understand that. You don't have to like it, but that is the way the law works.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2016, 01:57 PM
 
19,943 posts, read 16,259,780 times
Reputation: 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by cupper3 View Post
Perhaps those that are elected, and not appointed. Not vetted for legal knowledge, but run on popularity. Yeah, I can see those being devoid of a great constitutional understanding. Thankfully, there are judges at higher levels who actually have to be screened, including Congressional hearings.
I would argue that the SCOTUS currently has a few that have no idea what the Constitution actually says. It's crystal clear when we see the recent rulings.
Quote:


SCOTUS has ruled that the 14th Amendment applies to all, including gay right to marry. There are many SCOTUS and our own SCC decisions I don't agree with, but they are the law of the land. If you believe in due process and the supremacy of accepted law, one's option is to have either the constitution changed, or bring other laws inline with the constitution as interpreted by the senior judges.
And they were wrong.
Quote:
To whine and snivel and complain and deny gets you nowhere.
I recognize that. Unfortunately there is not a lot I can do.
Quote:

I have personally been involved in a Supreme Court of Canada decision involving the constitutionality of the government requiring firearms to be registered which was lost by our side. Didn't like it one bit. So myself, and many others, lobbied a political party to make it part of their platform to change that law. They got elected 10 years ago, and 8 years ago, changed the law so firearms (other than handguns) do not have be registered, and they ordered that the database and all copies be destroyed, so that no future government could use it.

That's how you deal with decisions you don't like. Can't get the support for a constitutional change? Maybe your case is not strong enough, and most people do not agree with you.
Unfortunately, in America, we have courts that bow to public opinion and rewrite laws on the fly, rather than actually requiring that the Constitution or the Laws be changed.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2016, 02:07 PM
 
4,851 posts, read 2,133,809 times
Reputation: 1587
Quote:
Originally Posted by cupper3 View Post
They illegally did not offer it. You need to understand that. You don't have to like it, but that is the way the law works.


You cannot illegally NOT offer a line of service . That's a business's prerogative .

To put this in real world perspective , answer me this .

A normal everyday baker decides to start making Jewish baked goods to supplement the business because they see an unfulfilled need . The baker is not religious but just trying to increase business . It goes over well , and so the baker adds Catholic baked goods to their product line . This too works well so they add some Eastern Orthodox pastries as well . One day a Muslim comes in and wants some Muslim style pastries . The baker says that she doesn't make them . The Muslim gets angry , states that she makes pastries for Christians and Jews , and so she should have to make them for Muslims also . The woman states that she sees no real market for them,doesn't know how to make them , and doesn't want to have to learn them or bake them .

Can the Muslim force the baker to start baking him Muslim pastries because the woman has found a niche she chooses to fill among some other religious groups ?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2016, 02:46 PM
 
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,463,675 times
Reputation: 4559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio View Post
I would argue that the SCOTUS currently has a few that have no idea what the Constitution actually says. It's crystal clear when we see the recent rulings.

And they were wrong.

I recognize that. Unfortunately there is not a lot I can do.


Unfortunately, in America, we have courts that bow to public opinion and rewrite laws on the fly, rather than actually requiring that the Constitution or the Laws be changed.
As I outlined in another thread:

Senior judges are screened by legislatures, by representatives that are elected by the people. The composition of those legislatures change when the people believe a change is needed, and any judges appointed and screened will reflect the viewpoints at that point in time.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:09 PM.

© 2005-2023, 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