Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
 
Old 03-29-2015, 10:50 AM
 
Location: North America
14,204 posts, read 12,279,947 times
Reputation: 5565

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by T0103E View Post
Where does anyone acquire the right to tell a business owner who he/she must sell to? It's also odd to me that people treat owning an "official" business differently than selling something on eBay, or Craigslist, or any other transaction. It's all voluntary trade. If one side doesn't consent, why do people think they can step in and force them to do it anyway? See my first sentence...
The law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-29-2015, 11:03 AM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
30,976 posts, read 21,633,814 times
Reputation: 9676
How would using religious principles in the bible work to justify discrimination against gays? I ask, because I know of no bible verse, which specifically states that a Christian is supposed to avoid associating with gay people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2015, 11:04 AM
 
Location: Madison, WI
5,301 posts, read 2,354,699 times
Reputation: 1229
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~HecateWhisperCat~ View Post
The law.
Where do the lawmakers get that right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2015, 11:11 AM
 
Location: Denver metro
1,225 posts, read 3,229,215 times
Reputation: 2301
Did anyone else catch Indiana's latest tourism campaign? It's just about dead on lol.

https://youtu.be/5LH2FVxrj4k
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2015, 11:14 AM
 
7,359 posts, read 5,462,865 times
Reputation: 3142
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~HecateWhisperCat~ View Post
The law.
That's a cop-out answer. The law once banned you from getting an abortion. If someone had said "where does someone get the right to ban a woman from getting an abortion?" would you have said "the law" and left it at that?

"It's the law" is a valid reason for saying someone shouldn't do something, but it's not a valid reason for saying the law shouldn't be changed. And that's what this thread is about - changing the law. Current law cannot be used as a reason for not changing the law. That's circular reasoning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2015, 11:21 AM
 
Location: North America
14,204 posts, read 12,279,947 times
Reputation: 5565
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidkaos2 View Post
That's a cop-out answer. The law once banned you from getting an abortion. If someone had said "where does someone get the right to ban a woman from getting an abortion?" would you have said "the law" and left it at that?

"It's the law" is a valid reason for saying someone shouldn't do something, but it's not a valid reason for saying the law shouldn't be changed. And that's what this thread is about - changing the law. Current law cannot be used as a reason for not changing the law. That's circular reasoning.
I didn't say it shouldn't be or couldn't be. He simply asked who gave them the right. In this case the law will likely be flipped back anyway. Adding sexual orientation to non discrimination will likely be the next battleground for this issue. Another battleground that the right will most likely be on the losing end of. Personally I don't have a problem with a business being able to refuse who they want. In the end they are only hurting themselves. However, you can't cherry pick which groups deserve protections either. So as long as anti discrimination measures exist for who you can or can't serve then I support adding sexual orientation to the laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2015, 11:22 AM
 
Location: North America
14,204 posts, read 12,279,947 times
Reputation: 5565
Quote:
Originally Posted by T0103E View Post
Where do the lawmakers get that right?
Pretty sure that one is obvious.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2015, 11:26 AM
 
Location: in a pond with the other human scum
2,361 posts, read 2,537,231 times
Reputation: 2808
Quote:
Originally Posted by T0103E View Post
Where do the lawmakers get that right?
The Civil Rights Act of 1964, for starters.

Specifically the "public accommodations" provisions. Your right of association has limits.

I use wikipedia links because they do a pretty good job of summarizing the law.

And I'm just answering the question. The 1964 Civil Rights Act doesn't trump the Indiana statute with regard to gays etc., because they're not a protected class (race, color, religion, sex, or national origin) under the Act.

This is less about the law and more about a growing number of people (a majority, I'll bet) who are appalled at the state of Indiana enacting a needless law. I believe the states where photographers and bakers have run into trouble have legislation making sexual orientation a protected class, but haven't looked into it. I have better things to do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2015, 11:39 AM
 
Location: Arizona
13,778 posts, read 9,661,538 times
Reputation: 7485
Quote:
Originally Posted by T0103E View Post
You're not being punished. It's like saying that you're punishing someone of the opposite sex by not dating them. You have the right to ask why, sure...but why would a third party need to step in? It's between you and the owner of what you're trying to purchase, and if one side doesn't consent, I guess the deal won't be done.



Yes, if the owner decides that his or her business will or won't do something, the employee should respect that. If not, they could potentially be fired. It's not the employee's business...it's the owner's business, and he or she hired the employee to help. If you open a sandwich shop, business increases, and you need a helping hand, you'd hire someone to assist you. Does that mean they now have the right to overrule you on how to run the shop?



Deny what rights?
Irregardless of what anybody say's, this nation is a secular nation. Discrimination is illegal for any reason and under all circumstances. Religion is not a mitigating factor in discrimination.
If I belong to the "Church of the Mighty *****", I cannot use my religion as an excuse not to give/sell water to anyone affiliated with the Republican party. If I pass a law allowing me to refuse service based on my religious beliefs, then I am using religion as a basis for law in this country. It's no different than ISIS instituting Sharia law as the law of the land.
I repeat, we are a secular nation, not founded on any one religion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2015, 11:58 AM
 
Location: Madison, WI
5,301 posts, read 2,354,699 times
Reputation: 1229
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~HecateWhisperCat~ View Post
Pretty sure that one is obvious.
To me, it's obvious that nobody can possibly have that right, and therefore can't delegate it to anyone else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyrano View Post
The Civil Rights Act of 1964, for starters.

Specifically the "public accommodations" provisions. Your right of association has limits.

I use wikipedia links because they do a pretty good job of summarizing the law.

And I'm just answering the question. The 1964 Civil Rights Act doesn't trump the Indiana statute with regard to gays etc., because they're not a protected class (race, color, religion, sex, or national origin) under the Act.

This is less about the law and more about a growing number of people (a majority, I'll bet) who are appalled at the state of Indiana enacting a needless law. I believe the states where photographers and bakers have run into trouble have legislation making sexual orientation a protected class, but haven't looked into it. I have better things to do.
I understand. I'm just focusing on where that right came from in the first place, regardless of what the law says. If nobody individually has the right to force a business owner to do something, I don't see how they can say "we give that right to lawmakers and law enforcement" because you can't delegate a right that you never had to begin with.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:57 PM.

© 2005-2024, 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