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.
Do you know what the call a small business that refuses to provide the things their customers demand? Bankrupt!
When you are operating a business you are in the world of mammon and any other religious affiliation is rendered null and void so long as the OPEN sign is on your door. Secular Law protects business from some financial problems and requires them to serve anyone with the money to pay for the product.
It is illegal for a business to discriminate, which is what the cake baker did.
It is not illegal to not provide someone with service and not give a reason.
It very well might be illegal if someone could show in court that every time you refuse to provide a service it coincides with whenever a black person or a Muslim person or a gay person requests to buy that service.
It is not illegal to not provide someone with service and not give a reason.
In most areas of the country you are wrong.
I remember being stationed in the Navy in the South in early 1950s. Signs on the stores saying, "We Do Not Serve N******". And other to me very offensive signs (I am Scandinavian White by ancestry). I remember when on liberty, and having another sailor in a group that was Black, or Hispanic, and they refused us entry into a decent restaurant as long as that person was with us.
Going to a bus station, and signs saying "Whites only" on drinking fountains and bathrooms. They had an outhouse out back and a faucet with a short hose for non whites use. And forcing all colored races to sit in only the last 3 rows of busses, the rest having to stand in the back, even when half the rest of the bus was empty.
Theaters that people of color were forced to sit in 3 rows in the back (usually lower quality seats), and once those seats were were filled, no more people of color would be admitted no matter how empty the theater was.
Some of the biggest in the business black performers and bands, were booked into major hotels for entertainment, and they had to enter by a back door only, and could not get a room in the hotel, or eat in the restaurants.
Those kinds of attitudes forced the federal government, and the states, to make laws that if you open a business to the public, that you have to be non discriminatory serving the public without regards to race, religion, etc., etc. It was to make people equal under the law, all able to get service no matter what as the owner what your own personal preferences, or hatreds, or religious beliefs are.
That new Indiana law, will of course be kicked out before after reaching the U.S. Supreme Court. Any intelligent person that has seen the effects of the discrimination in the past, does not want to see those times reoccur. When I see some of the posts on this thread, it simply makes me sick that some people still want the hatred of the past to come back.
I have spent my entire life in the business world since getting out of the U.S. Navy in 1954, so I do understand what happened in the past and don't want those hatreds to come back.
I was the division sales manager for a major corporation for Michigan and Ohio at one time. The corporation required that employment applications have a 80 for colored man, and a 40 for white put up in the right hand corner by the person doing the interviewing. If it was a 40, you were to find a reason other than color not to hire them. One day I had a young man that was working for the state social services as that was the only job he could find. College educated, with a 3.9 GPA. Well dressed and well spoken. The ideal candidate for a sales job. Only problem he was a Black Man. I broke company rules and hired him. He proved right away to be one of the best salesmen in t he country. He brought his friend in with the same problem and I hired him. I promoted both into lower management positions over several salespeople. They were real top performers and their customers liked them.
One day the National Sales Manager came in from Chicago to have Lunch with myself and my superior the Division Manager. I had known Don before he was given this big promotion. He requested that I have my two hot shot salespeople have dinner with us at a very fancy restaurant. I will never forget his face when they walked up to the table and took their seats that were waiting for them. He had a good meeting with them. After lunch back at the offices, he and my boss called me in for a talk. Don asked me why I had broken the company rules and hired them. I told him that when I see the best candidates in a long time, I will hire them and if I am wrong and they don't work out, I will also fire them. But I am not going to fire those two.
He looked at me and got on the phone and called the corporate headquarters and had a new order sent to all divisions. It was there would be no more discrimination in hiring people, and used those two men to break a rule that had been in effect long before he was giving his present job. He now had proof that it was not a good policy for the company to have. Don himself was not in favor of the rule, but to do away with it he had to have proof it was wrong.
I also broke the rules against hiring women for sales in that company, hiring the first ones.
I learned to hate discrimination when WWII started. I was having breakfast with my best friend when the news came out about the Pearl Harbor attack. There were his parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles, brothers, sisters and cousins there for their weekly Sunday morning breakfast. There were 5 young men there, that got incensed about that attack and went down to volunteer to fight those damn Japs the next day. They were rejected because they were Japanese Americans whose families had been in the U.S. 150 years. They owned a big greenhouse business half a block away, and all had homes in the area. A short time later, I stood in front of my house and watched those families all rounded up, stripped of their possessions and business and hauled away in busses to be kept in concentration camps due to their race. They were as American as anyone in t he U.S. and were as angry as anyone in the country about that attack by those Damn Japs as they called them. But due to their race, they were locked up in concentration camps. However because they were white, Germans were not rounded up, and Italians were not rounded up, and put in concentration camps.
When some of the people on this thread uphold discrimination against people for any reason due to color of skin or ethnic group, for religious reasons, for sexual orientation, etc., etc., it makes me sick at such low quality individuals upholding such discrimination in business and in life.
I could support a religious person refusing goods/services to people based on their religious beliefs if they did so for everyone who was sinning against their religion not just one type of sinner out of them all. That means if you are Catholic and you do not want to provide goods or services to gay people because being gay, having gay sex, or having a gay marriage is against your religion, then you should also not want to provide goods/services for every person who is divorced, who has killed someone, having premarital sex, using the birth control pill, committing adultery, who has stolen something, lied, coveted someone's spouse, used the Lords name in vain, not kept the Sabbath day holy, etc. for the same reason. I was born and raised Catholic. There is no place in the bible that I am aware of that says being gay is a worse sin than all of the rest and that those sinners should be singled out over the rest. Or if you're a different religion than a Catholic, everyone who is or has committed any of the acts your religion considers a sin you should not provide goods or services to.
I think the biggest difference here is most people who have premarital sex, are divorced, use birth control, etc., do not label themselves as such. Let's face it, gay people label themselves as gay. There is a huge difference. You never see someone identify themselves as a "Birth Control User" or "Adulterer-American". I do see where you were going with this, but I think it is quite different.
I also think the fact that the science isn't settled (God, I hate that phrase) on whether homosexuality is genetic is where people can justify their hatred/disliking/etc. for homosexuals.
I further believe if this issue weren't forced on everyone who watches the news on a daily basis, this wouldn't be such a hot button issue for some people. The news is about how some loving gay couple was discriminated against by some bigoted Christian monster. It's never that the gay couple went looking for the attention. NO...an activist would NEVER do that.
Finally, I think the issue of bedroom activities comes into play here. We've all got some image in our mind when it comes to gay couples. Some see two people who are productive and love each other. Some people envision what happens in the bedroom. Some people are bothered by two guys kissing. I'll even admit that I don't care to see it. But, I'm not a fan of public kissing anyway. It just seems a little childish to me. Sorry, two guys kissing just isn't natural in my mind. The same with 2 girls.
If you've got this far I also feel the need to say I don't have a dog in this hunt. I'm trying to explain things as I see them in my own little world. Do I think open discrimination is wrong? Yes. I do. But, there needs to be a little give and take here. Dancing around in one's underwear or wearing buttless chaps isn't a good way to say "we're just like you." That doesn't ease people's minds. Be gay, be proud, but expect people to push back if you act like a fool. Many people have that image of gays in their minds. Put a stop to that crap and show people we're all equal and things should improve. Keep rocking the banan hammock on a float, and don't expect much. The most visible of your group has a large impact on your group's image.
Last edited by Oldhag1; 04-02-2015 at 07:39 PM..
Reason: Removed icon
And what on God's green Earth is a gay themed wedding cake? I've been to many weddings - both gay and straight - and while each cake was different, there was no way to distinguish between the "gay cakes" and the "straight cakes." A three tiered cake covered in piped buttercream rosettes is a three tiered cake covered in piped buttercream rosettes no matter where it is.
It's the TOPPER that people complain about: Two grooms or Two brides on top, THAT is what a "gay themed cake" is.
I don't what they think of when the topper isn't there, or it's a set of wedding bells on top!
It's also the mere fact that it is for a gay or lesbian couple that also makes it "gay themed" to the business owner, who discriminates based on these "religious grounds".
I don't care what two people do in their bedroom, like everyone does with gays. I know how children come about, but I don't automatically assume I know what went on in their bedroom to get those children!
Last edited by Oldhag1; 04-02-2015 at 07:40 PM..
Reason: Removed icon
"I won't accommodate you as a customer in my establishment because you're a homosexual and I oppose homosexuality."
"I won't accommodate you as a customer in my establishment because you're requesting I incorporate pornographic imagery in my work and I refuse to do that."
"I won't accommodate you as a customer in my establishment because you're a homosexual and I oppose homosexuality."
"I won't accommodate you as a customer in my establishment because you're requesting I incorporate pornographic imagery in my work and I refuse to do that."
These things are very different.
No they are not different. One is saying I oppose homosexuality either way. Putting two men, or two woman on the top of a cake is no more pornographic imagery than putting one man and one woman figure on the cake.
Because of narrow minded people in this country, the federal government had to step in, and make it against the law to discriminate in businesses. If you open a business, the day you open it you give up your right to discriminate against any potential customer that is in your place of business to conduct legal business with you.
Your business license is a permit to do legal business with all customers on a equal basis. It is in essence agreeing that you are going to not to discriminate against any class of customer.
And the idea that because of a religious belief that certain people are not as good as others, is not following religion.
Genesis 1:27 - So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Acts 10:28 And he said to them, "You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a man who is a Jew to associate with a foreigner or to visit him; and yet God has shown me that I should not call any man unholy or unclean.
If we are a Christian we should believe that all men and women were created by God. God created both the hetrosexual men and women, and he also created the homosexual man and woman. If God created them, then who are we to say he made a mistake and that some people are not worthy and they are unholy or unclean.
If you are in business then do business. Nobody is telling anyone what to do in their own home or private club.
IMHO - Why should everyone have to have their choices restricted by someone else's religious restrictions or the prudes terrified of anyone having improper thoughts. The latter would have all women dressed in long Victorian dresses and men in business suits. Then they would add all women be subservient because women cannot be ever considered adults.
I remember being stationed in the Navy in the South in early 1950s. Signs on the stores saying, "We Do Not Serve N******". And other to me very offensive signs (I am Scandinavian White by ancestry). I remember when on liberty, and having another sailor in a group that was Black, or Hispanic, and they refused us entry into a decent restaurant as long as that person was with us.
Going to a bus station, and signs saying "Whites only" on drinking fountains and bathrooms. They had an outhouse out back and a faucet with a short hose for non whites use. And forcing all colored races to sit in only the last 3 rows of busses, the rest having to stand in the back, even when half the rest of the bus was empty.
Theaters that people of color were forced to sit in 3 rows in the back (usually lower quality seats), and once those seats were were filled, no more people of color would be admitted no matter how empty the theater was.
Some of the biggest in the business black performers and bands, were booked into major hotels for entertainment, and they had to enter by a back door only, and could not get a room in the hotel, or eat in the restaurants.
Those kinds of attitudes forced the federal government, and the states, to make laws that if you open a business to the public, that you have to be non discriminatory serving the public without regards to race, religion, etc., etc. It was to make people equal under the law, all able to get service no matter what as the owner what your own personal preferences, or hatreds, or religious beliefs are.
That new Indiana law, will of course be kicked out before after reaching the U.S. Supreme Court. Any intelligent person that has seen the effects of the discrimination in the past, does not want to see those times reoccur. When I see some of the posts on this thread, it simply makes me sick that some people still want the hatred of the past to come back.
I have spent my entire life in the business world since getting out of the U.S. Navy in 1954, so I do understand what happened in the past and don't want those hatreds to come back.
I was the division sales manager for a major corporation for Michigan and Ohio at one time. The corporation required that employment applications have a 80 for colored man, and a 40 for white put up in the right hand corner by the person doing the interviewing. If it was a 40, you were to find a reason other than color not to hire them. One day I had a young man that was working for the state social services as that was the only job he could find. College educated, with a 3.9 GPA. Well dressed and well spoken. The ideal candidate for a sales job. Only problem he was a Black Man. I broke company rules and hired him. He proved right away to be one of the best salesmen in t he country. He brought his friend in with the same problem and I hired him. I promoted both into lower management positions over several salespeople. They were real top performers and their customers liked them.
One day the National Sales Manager came in from Chicago to have Lunch with myself and my superior the Division Manager. I had known Don before he was given this big promotion. He requested that I have my two hot shot salespeople have dinner with us at a very fancy restaurant. I will never forget his face when they walked up to the table and took their seats that were waiting for them. He had a good meeting with them. After lunch back at the offices, he and my boss called me in for a talk. Don asked me why I had broken the company rules and hired them. I told him that when I see the best candidates in a long time, I will hire them and if I am wrong and they don't work out, I will also fire them. But I am not going to fire those two.
He looked at me and got on the phone and called the corporate headquarters and had a new order sent to all divisions. It was there would be no more discrimination in hiring people, and used those two men to break a rule that had been in effect long before he was giving his present job. He now had proof that it was not a good policy for the company to have. Don himself was not in favor of the rule, but to do away with it he had to have proof it was wrong.
I also broke the rules against hiring women for sales in that company, hiring the first ones.
I learned to hate discrimination when WWII started. I was having breakfast with my best friend when the news came out about the Pearl Harbor attack. There were his parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles, brothers, sisters and cousins there for their weekly Sunday morning breakfast. There were 5 young men there, that got incensed about that attack and went down to volunteer to fight those damn Japs the next day. They were rejected because they were Japanese Americans whose families had been in the U.S. 150 years. They owned a big greenhouse business half a block away, and all had homes in the area. A short time later, I stood in front of my house and watched those families all rounded up, stripped of their possessions and business and hauled away in busses to be kept in concentration camps due to their race. They were as American as anyone in t he U.S. and were as angry as anyone in the country about that attack by those Damn Japs as they called them. But due to their race, they were locked up in concentration camps. However because they were white, Germans were not rounded up, and Italians were not rounded up, and put in concentration camps.
When some of the people on this thread uphold discrimination against people for any reason due to color of skin or ethnic group, for religious reasons, for sexual orientation, etc., etc., it makes me sick at such low quality individuals upholding such discrimination in business and in life.
Excellent post and I totally agree!
I'm younger than you, but I remember the Civil Rights movement as a kid. The first news story I remember was hearing about the school desegregation riots in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1957. The films/photos of black protesters being beaten by police and attacked by dogs weren't images from some tv documentary; they were on the evening news. The same with the murders of civil rights workers and church bombings that killed children.
When I was applying to graduate schools in the 1970s, several in the South required that I submit a photo of myself. By that time, colleges couldn't openly request that you indicate your race on applications, so they found a "work around".
National Review That is a very good article. I would say it would never end as long as someone wants to push it.
What people aren't getting is that the businesses were serving all retail customers coming through their doors but at the point where they become a part of something forbidden by their religion that is where the line is crossed. I do not want to be a part of a celebration that entails something I consider immoral or indecent. I should have freedom of association based on my religious beliefs. When I sign an agreement to provide services, making a contract/agreement is becoming an essential party to the event, I become a sinner. While I sin, like everyone else, I try to avoid doing it and I certainly don't think my government has a right to demand that I do this.
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.
