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.
How do you feel about these people at the lunch counter? You know, the ones who helped spark the Civil Rights movement? No respect for them either, I bet? I'm sure that lunch counter owner was begin unfairly targeted. Oh, and it was a private business, in case you're forgotten, AT9.
False comparison fallacy. AKA Weak Analogy. Not even the same issue, try again.
No one is advocating such a thing, no one is saying gays can't be allowed in restaurants like everyone else. No one is even doing such a thing to begin with, all of these incidents have been over a specific service being requested and not a regular service. I know false hyperbole is all you've got on your side, and it may fool the masses, but I am a different animal all together. I am not a sheep, I am a Lion and I see right through your disingenuous sensationalism attacks.
No, in fact the police should have rounded up all the trouble makers in the crowd and arrested them for loitering, as they clearly are not customers. The people at the counter have been served.
Oh, so it was OK for those Negroes and their friends to set up a targeted protest, but it's not OK for gays.
False comparison fallacy. Not even the same issue, try again.
No one is advocating such a thing, no one is saying gays can't be allowed in restaurants like everyone else. No one is even doing such a thing to begin with, all of these incidents have been over a specific service being requested and not a regular service. I know false hyperbole is all you've got on your side, and it may fool the masses, but I am a different animal all together. I am not a sheep, I am a Lion and I see right through your disingenuous sensationalism attacks.
You don't understand the big picture, do you? I'm not talking about restaurants or skin color.
I'm talking about civil rights, private businesses and targeted protests, all three of which are things that are being discussed on this thread.
The lunch counter protests were exactly the same thing that you cons say gays shouldn't be doing. And gays are doing it because of the exact same reason as blacks did -- because they were being openly discriminated against. And they were doing it in a private business where the business owner did not want them.
You don't understand the big picture, do you? I'm not talking about restaurants or skin color.
I'm talking about civil rights, private businesses and targeted protests, all three of which are things that are being discussed on this thread.
The lunch counter protests were exactly the same thing that you cons say gays shouldn't be doing. And gays are doing it because of the exact same reason as blacks did -- because they were being openly discriminated against. And they were doing it in a private business where the business owner did not want them.
1, 2, 3. Big picture, Mr. Lion. Big picture.
A Christian man politely refusing to photograph a gay wedding out of respect for his deeply held beliefs equates to black people being brutally attacked by a racist mob at a restaurant? Talk about stretching things a bit.
Your logic is weak. Your argument has no water. It is you who is not seeing the "big picture" due to your vision being clouded by your own agenda and bias. In all of these cases it has been a gay person requesting a VERY SPECIFIC type of service, such as a wedding cake or a wedding it's self. It has not been everyday services such as cupcakes or photographs of their dogs. They were not barred from such services, just the SPECIFIC requests to which were in violation of that businesses deeply held religious values, and it is their freedom to have such beliefs and to refuse to do something if it violates their values.
Why would any gay couple want someone who didn't approve of their lifestyle be forced to do business with them. If I was the photographer I'd take all bad pictures. If I was the baker I'd defecate in the cake mix. You nitwits know this is going to happen. So you made a point, goodie for you. Enjoy that slice of cake.
Certainly . The homosexual militant bullies operate under a seriously misguided notion that they can bully, force or otherwise “make†people do things against their beliefs.
The homosexual perpetrators would never eat a cake made under such circumstances and they only use these situations to cease upon every opportunity to put decent hard working people out of business and silence those who disagree with their agenda.
And in privately owned restaurants. The law has been clear since the 1950's. Your business license is your agreement to treat the public without discrimination. As far as the goat thing, you can run that up to the Supreme Court and see if goats are a protected class as far as discrimination laws are concerned.
BTW, when Rosa Parks decided to keep her seat on the bus, bus companies did not get public funding. They were private businesses, usually regulated by some public utility commission.
Incidentally, it really doesn't matter if any of us as single people agree or disagree with these laws. They are still the laws we have to live under unless and until somebody changes them.
I'm not saying it's not the law.
Fine, drop the goat and change it to something a little less ridiculous. Instead of a goat, I'm a Morman polygamist. Those are (theoretically...) consenting adults. Why is that different?
As for the Rosa Parks example, we're there other busses operating that she could have ridden? My guess (because I don't know for sure) is no. I concede that private businesses shouldn't discriminate when they have a monopoly on a certain service or product. But an individual photographer or baker is different.
Ultimately it's Roberts who decides what they hear, correct? I think the answer is #1 in your list. It could be that they just don't want to deal with it, sort of what they did with Prop 8.
However. Somebody (if that somebody exists) answer this question: if SCOTUS had heard the case and upheld it, would that ruling then apply to ALL states? Because if it does, that could be why Roberts didn't want to hear it.
I think the justices vote. It takes 4 votes to grant cert for a case to be heard by the Court.
Last edited by mensaguy; 04-07-2014 at 01:12 PM..
Reason: Dang spelling police.
A Christian man politely refusing to photograph a gay wedding out of respect for his deeply held beliefs equates to black people being brutally attacked by a racist mob at a restaurant? Talk about stretching things a bit.
Your logic is weak. Your argument has no water. It is you who is not seeing the "big picture" due to your vision being clouded by your own agenda and bias. In all of these cases it has been a gay person requesting a VERY SPECIFIC type of service, such as a wedding cake or a wedding it's self. It has not been everyday services such as cupcakes or photographs of their dogs. They were not barred from such services, just the SPECIFIC requests to which were in violation of that businesses deeply held religious values, and it is their freedom to have such beliefs and to refuse to do something if it violates their values.
Don't tread on the religious freedoms of others.
Pfffft. You really don't get it.
It doesn't matter why someone is being discriminated against. "Religious beliefs" are just a smokescreen that you think will work. I'm sure that nice lunch counter proprietor had his own deeply-help beliefs which, by the way, were certainly reinforced by his nice pastor.
The last time I looked, nobody is asking you to bless a gay marriage or allow one in your church. And your heart, home and church are the only places in America where you're permitted to be a bigot. Not in a business serving the public.
Fine, drop the goat and change it to something a little less ridiculous. Instead of a goat, I'm a Morman polygamist. Those are (theoretically...) consenting adults. Why is that different?
It doesn't matter why someone is being discriminated against. "Religious beliefs" are just a smokescreen that you think will work. I'm sure that nice lunch counter proprietor had his own deeply-help beliefs which, by the way, were certainly reinforced by his nice pastor.
The last time I looked, nobody is asking you to bless a gay marriage or allow one in your church. And your heart, home and church are the only places in America where you're permitted to be a bigot. Not in a business serving the public.
Until you can offer a substantial argument instead of name calling and sensational hyperbole fallacies than there is nothing left to discuss. Have a nice day!
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.
I'm not talking about restaurants or skin color.
. The homosexual militant bullies operate under a seriously misguided notion that they can bully, force or otherwise “make†people do things against their beliefs.
