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)
View Poll Results: Should a business be able to deny service to a customer if the request conflicts with the owner’s re
Yes 105 54.12%
No 80 41.24%
Not sure 9 4.64%
Voters: 194. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 08-08-2017, 05:54 PM
 
34,620 posts, read 21,459,003 times
Reputation: 22231

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by T0103E View Post
You're right that private businesses aren't treated as if they're private. They should be, but they aren't. The government exerts ownership over everything within its borders, even if they claim that you own it. That includes your own body. You don't own yourself...the government owns you, and a most people cheer for it.
Some people really don't like the idea of choice.

When choice is an option, it's hard to make others do what you want.

As long as you aren't hurting others, you should be able to choose to do practically anything you want.

BTW, not getting cake isn't harm.

 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:05 PM
 
Location: Madison, WI
5,295 posts, read 2,332,638 times
Reputation: 1227
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
Some people really don't like the idea of choice.

When choice is an option, it's hard to make others do what you want.

As long as you aren't hurting others, you should be able to choose to do practically anything you want.

BTW, not getting cake isn't harm.
Couldn't have said it much better.
 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:08 PM
 
Location: City Data Land
17,156 posts, read 12,869,125 times
Reputation: 33164
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
Some people really don't like the idea of choice.

When choice is an option, it's hard to make others do what you want.

As long as you aren't hurting others, you should be able to choose to do practically anything you want.

BTW, not getting cake isn't harm.
Here we go again, Pedro. Discrimination is harmful. Ask Rosa Parks. The disgust of an invisible god is not sufficient reason to deny service.
 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:11 PM
 
34,620 posts, read 21,459,003 times
Reputation: 22231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby Snacks View Post
Here we go again, Pedro. Discrimination is harmful. Ask Rosa Parks. The disgust of an invisible god is not sufficient reason to deny service.
What actual harm is done when a non-essential business denies service based on discrimination?

Is it just inconvenience?
 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:26 PM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,454 posts, read 16,321,715 times
Reputation: 5936
Quote:
Originally Posted by No_Recess View Post
You're running on unfounded fear again.

If a baker refuses to serve minorities he isn't going to stay open for long because

1. Minorities will buy at his competitor
2. Most non-minorities are not racist and won't go to his shop

The free market will correct accordingly.

You statists can get pretty paranoid with this doom and gloom stuff and how most people are a tick away from being Hitler reincarnated with the only thing stopping them from doing so is the government.
2 points to be made here.

Your life is not mine, nor mine yours. Do not let your own experiences cloud your better judgement of the realities of the world, especially when your own argument is to allow discrimination.



Second point, the Free Market is not designed to exact revenge. As long as "Business A" provides a good product at a good price, their racism or homophobia will be overlooked.

Roy Moore will be a US senator in a couple of months, that alone should tell you that the world isnt as full of sunshine and rainbows as you claim.
 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:29 PM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,454 posts, read 16,321,715 times
Reputation: 5936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Workin_Hard View Post
Bad analogy. My ex tried to kill me. Nazis have never tried to kill me. (Note: I have since remarried which simply illustrates the triumph of hope over experience.) When is the last time a group of Nazis organized as a recognized military unit tried to kill anyone? 1945?
Its not a bad analogy, you are simply using the worse case of anecdotal evidence I have ever seen.
 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:39 PM
 
Location: Silicon Valley, CA
13,563 posts, read 10,280,714 times
Reputation: 8247
Quote:
Originally Posted by idr591 View Post
Why is Chick-Fil-A allowed to close on Sunday? Why can't I buy beer before noon on Sunday? So many questions. Let people do whatever they want. If it's stupid or bigoted, it will probably come back to haunt them.
Because Chick-Fil-A isn't discriminating against anyone based on classifications if they close on Sunday. They don't serve anyone at all.

Alcohol sale restrictions on time and place apply to all in that jurisdiction.
 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:40 PM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,454 posts, read 16,321,715 times
Reputation: 5936
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDusty View Post
Well of course it's not the moral equivalent. That's not really my point.

Religious freedom, which I state earlier, is a protected right. Should I ask anyone to violate their personal religious beliefs, they should have the right to refuse.

There's always a limit, as I said earlier. A doctor can't say "I think homosexuality is an abomination" and refuse treatment of a gay person in that respect. I actually don't believe any service can be entirely refused based on small details like that. However, in specific circumstances, like a gay wedding, I think a person can justly point to religious objections. This because the ground for refusing services is less rooted in the person and more so in a specific 'thing.'

An easy example I often use when talking about the bakery issue, I think a baker should be expected to sell french bread to any gay person who enters. Should that same baker be asked to bake them a wedding cake for their wedding reception, I think then they may site religious objections.

I wasnt talking about morality. I was talking about legal intent.



As for marriage vs french bread. That is just as bad an argument

If you claim to have a religious objection to an individual based on a characteristic, that objection is to the status of the individual. Not their conduct.

So your objection should be with them being gay, not them having a wedding. That is after the fact and that is why all these people keep losing their court cases when trying to defend their discrimination.

They would actually have a better religious freedom claim if they didnt sell bread to a gay person.
 
Old 08-08-2017, 07:12 PM
 
Location: Kansas
25,635 posts, read 21,807,090 times
Reputation: 26223
I am going to say "no". You either serve the PUBLIC or you don't.

"Religious beliefs" leaves far too much wiggle room. And, we all know this isn't as much about the "cake" as it is "race" when people start up with they should be able to refuse anyone for any reason, or even gender. We have members here who really don't do very well in hiding their prejudices, and we are talking about RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, not one's racial and gender prejudices.

It is wrong that in order to get the agenda news coverage, that gay couples went out of their way to seek services from people known to oppose SSM based on their religious beliefs, but that is on the gay couple. When one opens a business, it is much like a job, they have agreed that they will provide a service to the public when licensed for a certain type of business.

My bet is that this is a non-issue in most smaller cities, that they went into business realizing they would be serving the public, so just do perform their services for customers.

God knows a person's heart, and I bet He understands. I think the real issue comes from the churches that some of these "business" people belong to. The hatred from the church forces the business owner to comply. Some churches are just evil, and of course, the leaders aren't the ones on the frontlines.

So, no, a business open to the PUBLIC should serve anyone that comes in, acts appropriately and has money to pay for the services traditionally provided by that business.

"Golden Rule" is in play here. Again, God knows the person's heart.
 
Old 08-08-2017, 07:15 PM
 
Location: Upstate NY 🇺🇸
36,754 posts, read 14,724,902 times
Reputation: 35583
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahzzie View Post
They shouldn't be allowed to refuse service due to religious beliefs. They are running a business. They need to leave their religious beliefs at home when dealing with the public.


No, they don't.

And let's be real here. The newsworthy incidents have involved businesses whose owners have resisted being forced to compromise their religious views simply because certain members of activist groups smelled a Christian.

Give me a break.
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.


Closed Thread


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.

© 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