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.
I will say this though; the business can't discriminate against a gay couple without possible legal ramifications. That being said, why would the gay couple want to patronize the business anyway? To **** the business off? Ok, I could see that. Hell, I would probably do it myself. However, I wouldn't give the business one cent. I would tell them to f.uc.k off and then leave. That's just me though.
I will say this though; the business can't discriminate against a gay couple without possible legal ramifications. That being said, why would the gay couple want to patronize the business anyway? To **** the business off? Ok, I could see that. Hell, I would probably do it myself. However, I wouldn't give the business one cent. I would tell them to f.uc.k off and then leave. That's just me though.
There are some gray areas. Say a photographer has a small studio. They take photos there of anyone who wants a photo. They also do events. Say a gay couple wants the photographer to do their wedding. The photographer has to attend the wedding. It is away from the business of public accommodation, the studio, yet if they don't do the wedding they would be discriminating. What if the photographer did not have a studio but did only weddings, and refused to do a gay wedding? What if they had a small studio in their basement, do they still have to do the gay wedding? I see a difference between the studio work (the public accommodation place) and work they do off site, or not directly from the store front.
If the photographer has a studio open to the public, he/she is not private. A photographer that is working from their home, not open to the public, aka private, can make any discerning factor he/she wants on who they do photos of, even if they travel to another site to do that service. I am a gardener, I work from my home, but travel to my job sites. I am not open to the public, a private business. I can pick and choose who I want to work for. One would think that because I am gay and open about it, that most of my clients would be gay. Funny thing is only one out of 25 of my clients is gay. Any way, if the local nursery that is open to the public contracts a job doing a yard, since they are not a private business and are open to the public, they do not have the right to refuse service to a client based on discriminating factors.
I will say this though; the business can't discriminate against a gay couple without possible legal ramifications. That being said, why would the gay couple want to patronize the business anyway? To **** the business off? Ok, I could see that. Hell, I would probably do it myself. However, I wouldn't give the business one cent. I would tell them to f.uc.k off and then leave. That's just me though.
I would too, and tell every one of my friends about my experience with that business. No matter what the problem was.
The actual results of this poll are saying something far different than the posts in this thread are. Maybe people who voted 'Yes' are just vocal.
I didn't vote. If a business is operating in a state, they are subject to the laws of that state. If that state has anti discrimination laws then that business must follow the law or they will get fined.
We all have to follow laws some we agree with some we don't. If we don't we are going to pay the penalty. That is the price of living in a civilized society.
If the servers are on US ground, absolutely. They are providing a public service. If a Christian homosexual wants to use the site to find other Christian homosexuals, then the site should provide.
I hope you answered yes on this poll if you didn't your clearly didn't understand the question.
A New Mexico photo studio fined for refusing to shoot a lesbian couple's commitment ceremony has lost its third round in a legal battle that has ignited the ire of religious-freedom advocates.
PS forcing a restaurant to violate it's religious beliefs is bigoted and unconstitutional
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.
Should Christian business owners who refuse to support gay marriage be shut down by the government?
