Arizona Senate Passes Bill Allowing Business Owners To Refuse Service To Gays

[hangover]

Reload this Page Arizona Senate Passes Bill Allowing Business Owners To Refuse Service To Gays

No different than refusing to serve blacks. I love it when cons expose their bigotry and hate for everyone to see. It makes it so easy for liberals to win elections.

 

[bendog]

Reload this Page Arizona Senate Passes Bill Allowing Business Owners To Refuse Service To Gays

No different than refusing to serve blacks. I love it when cons expose their bigotry and hate for everyone to see. It makes it so easy for liberals to win elections.

Exactly. But is their a constitutional provision banning bigotry? A biz owner who'd turn away biz from any group damages himself. If we believe that the maj of people will act in their own self-interest, and that people are mostly inherently good and respect one another, the GLBT cause will win out in the end, regardless.

Why not just laugh at and ridicule bigots and fools?

 

[pvsi]

I think another state passed something similar to this last week so this must be a trend that is catching on. I agree with this bill that if you are a business owner and believe in and live by your faith that you should be able to refuse service to whoever you want.


Arizona Senate: Business owners can cite religion to refuse service to gays
Arizona Senate: Business owners can cite religion to refuse service to gays

I agree, only when I posted a sign on my business in 2009 stating that "those who support US government and military are not welcome here" - my place was vandalized. So republicans are not always what they preach... just saying, and there were other reasons for it too, such as me speaking out against the system before that.

 

[hangover]

I think another state passed something similar to this last week so this must be a trend that is catching on. I agree with this bill that if you are a business owner and believe in and live by your faith that you should be able to refuse service to whoever you want.


Arizona Senate: Business owners can cite religion to refuse service to gays
Arizona Senate: Business owners can cite religion to refuse service to gays

I agree, only when I posted a sign on my business in 2009 stating that "those who support US government and military are not welcome here" - my place was vandalized. So republicans are not always what they preach... just saying, and there were other reasons for it too, such as me speaking out against the system before that.

Don't you just love how the war machine defends America?

 

[N8dizzle]

The store owner that refuses service is doing something that negatively effects someone else.

They are making someone's life harder just to be hateful.

Who is the gay person hurting by buying something?

We all have to live in this world together. Why make things more difficult for anyone? Who benefits?

Sent from my SPH-D710 using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[Katzndogz]

It depends on what service it is. If a gay couple walk into a bakery and want to buy two dozen chocolate chip cookies it is wrong to refuse to serve them. If they want a personal service like a wedding cake, the baker should be allowed to refuse the service. That's a personal service. Since we don't allow slavery, anyone should be allowed to refuse to perform personal services at any time.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It depends on what service it is. If a gay couple walk into a bakery and want to buy two dozen chocolate chip cookies it is wrong to refuse to serve them. If they want a personal service like a wedding cake, the baker should be allowed to refuse the service. That's a personal service. Since we don't allow slavery, anyone should be allowed to refuse to perform personal services at any time.

It's not up to the People to accommodate the discriminatory whims of a business. It's up to the business to accommodate the non-discriminatory laws of the land,

or get out of that business.

 

[hangover]

The store owner that refuses service is doing something that negatively effects someone else.

They are making someone's life harder just to be hateful.

Who is the gay person hurting by buying something?

We all have to live in this world together. Why make things more difficult for anyone? Who benefits?

Sent from my SPH-D710 using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

After all this time the cons have not learned the lesson of Hitler's hate of the Jews. "Those that don't learn from history are bound to repeat it."

 

[NYcarbineer]

No it doesn't. How many restaurants or businesses have you ever been in that had a sign that read "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone!"? I've been in tons of them all over. It should be up to me who I want to serve and who I do not, the making of a profit is on me and only me. America is about freedom, let people choose who they choose to associate with, not forced.

You can pretend your business has the right to refuse service to a person of color, but you don't.

It is against the law and that law has been upheld as constitutional.

Wait, where does the constitution tell a business who they can serve again, be specific....

Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[g5000]

This is ridiculous, how do you know someone is gay? My friend and I have taken trips together and if we get a suite with a king bed for the same price as a regular room with 2 beds, we take the suite every time. What if they think we're lesbians? This is just stupid.

The bill allows a business owner to refuse service to anyone, not just gays, and they just have to site their own personal religiously held beliefs. The proposed laws specifically says those beliefs to not have to coincide with major established religious doctrine.


>>>>

It does not, stop lying.

It does, actually. If you get in a cab with a case of beer, the Muslim driver can refuse you service because alcohol is against his religion.

"We refuse service to infidels". That is basically the objection behind not making a cake for gays, right?

Well, that niggle can have many, many applications.

 

[hangover]

The bill allows a business owner to refuse service to anyone, not just gays, and they just have to site their own personal religiously held beliefs. The proposed laws specifically says those beliefs to not have to coincide with major established religious doctrine.


>>>>

It does not, stop lying.

It does, actually. If you get in a cab with a case of beer, the Muslim driver can refuse you service because alcohol is against his religion.

"We refuse service to infidels". That is basically the objection to making a cake for gays, right?

Well, that objection has many, many applications.

In a Muslim country, yes. In the U.S. he will lose his license, unless one of the beers is open.

 

[Againsheila]

I think another state passed something similar to this last week so this must be a trend that is catching on. I agree with this bill that if you are a business owner and believe in and live by your faith that you should be able to refuse service to whoever you want.


Arizona Senate: Business owners can cite religion to refuse service to gays
Arizona Senate: Business owners can cite religion to refuse service to gays

I agree, only when I posted a sign on my business in 2009 stating that "those who support US government and military are not welcome here" - my place was vandalized. So republicans are not always what they preach... just saying, and there were other reasons for it too, such as me speaking out against the system before that.

Why would you do such a thing? And why would you assume it was vandalized by republicans?

Not only would I have not patronized your business, had I seen that sign, but I would have led a protest outside your store, along with my friends, both liberal and conservative alike.

I would, of course, have simply ignored your business if you aren't in the US.

 

[Againsheila]

It depends on what service it is. If a gay couple walk into a bakery and want to buy two dozen chocolate chip cookies it is wrong to refuse to serve them. If they want a personal service like a wedding cake, the baker should be allowed to refuse the service. That's a personal service. Since we don't allow slavery, anyone should be allowed to refuse to perform personal services at any time.

Excellent point.

 

[Againsheila]

It depends on what service it is. If a gay couple walk into a bakery and want to buy two dozen chocolate chip cookies it is wrong to refuse to serve them. If they want a personal service like a wedding cake, the baker should be allowed to refuse the service. That's a personal service. Since we don't allow slavery, anyone should be allowed to refuse to perform personal services at any time.

It's not up to the People to accommodate the discriminatory whims of a business. It's up to the business to accommodate the non-discriminatory laws of the land,

or get out of that business.

It's a special order, everyone should have the right to refuse a special order, for whatever reason. What if they are too busy and don't have enough decorators or bakers?

 

[g5000]

Why would it go to court?

it violates the 1964 civil rights act?

No it doesn't.

Yes, it does. The Civil Rights Act banned this very type of discrimination.

) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.

b) Each of the following establishments which serves the public is a place of public accommodation within the meaning of this title if its operations affect commerce, or if discrimination or segregation by it is supported by State action:

(1) any inn, hotel, motel, or other establishment which provides lodging to transient guests, other than an establishment located within a building which contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and which is actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment as his residence;

(2) any restaurant, cafeteria, lunchroom, lunch counter, soda fountain, or other facility principally engaged in selling food for consumption on the premises, including, but not limited to, any such facility located on the

premises of any retail establishment; or any gasoline station;

(3) any motion picture house, theater, concert hall, sports arena, stadium or other place of exhibition or entertainment; and
(4) any establishment (A)(i) which is physically located within the premises of any establishment otherwise covered by this subsection, or (ii) within the premises of which is physically located any such covered establishment, and (B) which holds itself out as serving patrons of such covered establishment.

(c) The operations of an establishment affect commerce within the meaning of this title if (1) it is one of the establishments described in paragraph (1) of subsection (b); (2) in the case of an establishment described in paragraph (2) of subsection (b), it serves or offers to serve interstate travelers or a substantial portion of the food which it serves, or gasoline or other products which it sells, has moved in commerce; (3) in the case of an establishment described in paragraph (3) of subsection (b), it customarily presents films, performances, athletic teams, exhibitions, or other sources of entertainment which move in commerce; and (4) in the case of an establishment described in paragraph (4) of subsection (b), it is physically located within the premises of, or there is physically located within its premises, an establishment the operations of which affect commerce within the meaning of this subsection. For purposes of this section, "commerce" means travel, trade, traffic, commerce, transportation, or communication among the several States, or between the District of Columbia and any State, or between any foreign country or any territory or possession and any State or the District of Columbia, or between points in the same State but through any other State or the District of Columbia or a foreign country.

(d) Discrimination or segregation by an establishment is supported by State action within the meaning of this title if such discrimination or segregation (1) is carried on under color of any law, statute, ordinance, or regulation; or (2) is carried on under color of any custom or usage required or enforced by officials of the State or political subdivision thereof; or (3) is required by action of the State or political subdivision thereof.

(e) The provisions of this title shall not apply to a private club or other establishment not in fact open to the public, except to the extent that the facilities of such establishment are made available to the customers or patrons of an establishment within the scope of subsection (b).

 

[GreenBean]

I think another state passed something similar to this last week so this must be a trend that is catching on. I agree with this bill that if you are a business owner and believe in and live by your faith that you should be able to refuse service to whoever you want.


Arizona Senate: Business owners can cite religion to refuse service to gays
Arizona Senate: Business owners can cite religion to refuse service to gays

The other state was Kansas , and the bill died. This bill will also die, it's discriminatory not only against fruitcakes but real people as well.

 

[GreenBean]

it violates the 1964 civil rights act?

No it doesn't.

Yes, it does. The Civil Rights Act banned this very type of discrimination.

On the basis of Race, Religion, Creed not Sexual Perversion.

 

[g5000]

What is going to result from these attempts to continue the oppression of gays is that the haters will force the issue to the point that gays will be made into a protected class on the federal level. The haters will end up with the exact opposite achievment than they intend.

 

[g5000]

No it doesn't.

Yes, it does. The Civil Rights Act banned this very type of discrimination.

On the basis of Race, Religion, Creed not Sexual Perversion.

"Sexual Perversion".

Gosh, I wonder how people keep getting the impression the GOP hates gays, blacks, Muslims, and Mexicans.

It's a real mystery!

 

[GreenBean]

Yes, it does. The Civil Rights Act banned this very type of discrimination.

On the basis of Race, Religion, Creed not Sexual Perversion.

"Sexual Perversion".

Gosh, I wonder how people keep getting the impression the GOP hates gays, blacks, Muslims, and Mexicans.

It's a real mystery!

What's that got to do with Blacks, Muslims or Mexicans and what makes you think that I - the GreenBean , don't fall into one of those groups ? YOU'RE A RACIST !!!!