Indiana is for Bigots - video and Pence running for cover

[YellowDogDemocrat]

So why are they wasting so much time trying to deny rights? We all know how it is going to turn out in the long run anyway.

They're protecting 1st amendment rights if you look at it from the other side.

I don't know if the following applies to anything;
While I was in college I worked in a garden shop. I worked with two openly gay co-workers. One of them I got along with just fine, and the other one creeped me out. But, it wasn't my business and I had to try to get along with both of them as well as I could.
I worked there for a year and then I started a landscaping business while I was still in college. A guy hired me to take care of his yard and when I went to get paid he revealed to me that he was gay and he enjoyed watching me work. I didn't want to work for a dude that was checking out my ass so I never called him back or answered his calls. That was my right because it was my business.

I'm sure some women have left jobs for the same reason. That has nothing to do with the service you were being paid to provide. His inappropriate behavior toward you is a perfectly valid reason. Who said it wouldn't be?

 

[ChrisL]

I don't know what ****** is. Lol. But no, it doesn't work obviously. That is why this is happening now. You cannot change the way people think and feel by making laws. People change because they become educated in the things they don't understand. Making laws that force them only makes them angry, and then we have this right here.

******* = Blacks, and I don't give a damn what the bigots think or feel. The force of law works, well. That is why blacks can now stay at any hotel they like.

Why can't you just say "blacks" or "African Americans" or something?

And no, black people were still discriminated against. Martin Luther King's peaceful protests are what more than likely changed a LOT of hearts and minds anyways. Laws do not change the way people FEEL.

Nobody can enforce what somebody feels. You can, however, use the law to make them behave fairly.

That isn't a legitimate purpose of law.

If everybody was conforming to the requirements out of choice, why would we ever need any law in the first place? Laws are to enforce compliance. Nothing else.

Again, you are talking about forcing people to conform to your views via the law. I'm sorry, but that is just not justifiable IMO. Forcing people to do things with threats is no way to change hearts and minds, that's for sure. It creates animosity and resentment.

 

[ChrisL]

So you're ok with a doctor denying you treatment and you die?

Wow.

Ok that's your choice. I guess.

Personally, I'm not ok with it and believe that if you're in business to serve the public then you serve all of the public and you have no right to deny your services to anyone just because you and your religion doesn't like them.

Your attitude would have us still with jim crow segregation. I guess you believe that African Americans don't have the same rights as everyone else too.

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act requires that emergency care be given to anyone regardless of citizenship, legal status and ability to pay. I guarantee that any hospital or doctor in any State of the Union that denies care to a homo is going to be sued to high heaven. So, you're blowing hot air.

I also find it offensive how gay rights are constantly being equated with racial discrimination rights. It's like telling a cancer patient, "I know how you feel because I have a cold."

AS it should be, IMO. Being in the medical profession is not just any old job.

My question is, and which I always can't help but think of on threads like these, is WHY does anyone care what a person does in his or her bedroom? Why should that factor into anything at all?

 

[Vigilante]

******* = Blacks, and I don't give a damn what the bigots think or feel. The force of law works, well. That is why blacks can now stay at any hotel they like.

Why can't you just say "blacks" or "African Americans" or something?

And no, black people were still discriminated against. Martin Luther King's peaceful protests are what more than likely changed a LOT of hearts and minds anyways. Laws do not change the way people FEEL.

Nobody can enforce what somebody feels. You can, however, use the law to make them behave fairly.

That isn't a legitimate purpose of law.

If everybody was conforming to the requirements out of choice, why would we ever need any law in the first place? Laws are to enforce compliance. Nothing else.

Again, you are talking about forcing people to conform to your views via the law. I'm sorry, but that is just not justifiable IMO. Forcing people to do things with threats is no way to change hearts and minds, that's for sure. It creates animosity and resentment.

 

[bripat9643]

I don't know what ****** is. Lol. But no, it doesn't work obviously. That is why this is happening now. You cannot change the way people think and feel by making laws. People change because they become educated in the things they don't understand. Making laws that force them only makes them angry, and then we have this right here.

******* = Blacks, and I don't give a damn what the bigots think or feel. The force of law works, well. That is why blacks can now stay at any hotel they like.

Why can't you just say "blacks" or "African Americans" or something?

And no, black people were still discriminated against. Martin Luther King's peaceful protests are what more than likely changed a LOT of hearts and minds anyways. Laws do not change the way people FEEL.

Nobody can enforce what somebody feels. You can, however, use the law to make them behave fairly.

That isn't a legitimate purpose of law.

If everybody was conforming to the requirements out of choice, why would we ever need any law in the first place? Laws are to enforce compliance. Nothing else.

You don't get it. Government has no legitimate authority to force private citizens to treat others "fairly" according to its determination.

Your theory seems to be that people are free to make their own choices, so long as they don't make choices that the government and fascist creeps such as you don't like.

 

[bripat9643]

The force of the law worked just fine, it's why ******* can now check into whatever hotels they like, as long as they can pay the tab.

I don't know what ****** is. Lol. But no, it doesn't work obviously. That is why this is happening now. You cannot change the way people think and feel by making laws. People change because they become educated in the things they don't understand. Making laws that force them only makes them angry, and then we have this right here.

Isn't that the purpose for laws? If everybody wanted to do it anyway, there would be no need for any laws.

Businesses that refuse to cater to homosexuals, or anyone with MONEY, are going to be a HUGE minority in today's day and age.

ROFL! I hardly think so. The are less than 2% of the population, and they don't reproduce.

I'll repeat it for you since you completely misunderstood. I said BUSINESSES that refuse to cater to homosexuals are going to be a minority. In other words, there are not going to be many businesses that would refuse people's money, regardless of what they do in their bedroom.

MOST people don't really care about such things. Why YOU and others care so much about what a person does in the privacy of their bedroom is a complete mystery to me.

I only care when the government its prejudices onto people. That isn't freedom. It's tyranny.

 

[YellowDogDemocrat]

******* = Blacks, and I don't give a damn what the bigots think or feel. The force of law works, well. That is why blacks can now stay at any hotel they like.

Why can't you just say "blacks" or "African Americans" or something?

And no, black people were still discriminated against. Martin Luther King's peaceful protests are what more than likely changed a LOT of hearts and minds anyways. Laws do not change the way people FEEL.

Nobody can enforce what somebody feels. You can, however, use the law to make them behave fairly.

That isn't a legitimate purpose of law.

If everybody was conforming to the requirements out of choice, why would we ever need any law in the first place? Laws are to enforce compliance. Nothing else.

Again, you are talking about forcing people to conform to your views via the law. I'm sorry, but that is just not justifiable IMO. Forcing people to do things with threats is no way to change hearts and minds, that's for sure. It creates animosity and resentment.

You could be right. What do you think is the purpose of laws? You know you can't legislate beliefs or desires. All you can do is legislate behavior, and some won't like it no matter what the law is. Other than to define acceptable behavior, why do you think we have laws?

 

[YellowDogDemocrat]

******* = Blacks, and I don't give a damn what the bigots think or feel. The force of law works, well. That is why blacks can now stay at any hotel they like.

Why can't you just say "blacks" or "African Americans" or something?

And no, black people were still discriminated against. Martin Luther King's peaceful protests are what more than likely changed a LOT of hearts and minds anyways. Laws do not change the way people FEEL.

Nobody can enforce what somebody feels. You can, however, use the law to make them behave fairly.

That isn't a legitimate purpose of law.

If everybody was conforming to the requirements out of choice, why would we ever need any law in the first place? Laws are to enforce compliance. Nothing else.

You don't get it. Government has no legitimate authority to force private citizens to treat others "fairly" according to its determination.

Your theory seems to be that people are free to make their own choices, so long as they don't make choices that the government and fascist creeps such as you don't like.

What do you think the purpose of law is?

 

[ChrisL]

Why can't you just say "blacks" or "African Americans" or something?

And no, black people were still discriminated against. Martin Luther King's peaceful protests are what more than likely changed a LOT of hearts and minds anyways. Laws do not change the way people FEEL.

Nobody can enforce what somebody feels. You can, however, use the law to make them behave fairly.

That isn't a legitimate purpose of law.

If everybody was conforming to the requirements out of choice, why would we ever need any law in the first place? Laws are to enforce compliance. Nothing else.

Again, you are talking about forcing people to conform to your views via the law. I'm sorry, but that is just not justifiable IMO. Forcing people to do things with threats is no way to change hearts and minds, that's for sure. It creates animosity and resentment.

You could be right. What do you think is the purpose of laws? You know you can't legislate beliefs or desires. All you can do is legislate behavior, and some won't like it no matter what the law is. Other than to define acceptable behavior, why do you think we have laws?

If you want to be an arse, there should not be laws against it. That is just silly, IMO. Like I said, capitalism would sort this out. Those businesses who refuse to do business with a person because of such silly reasons are not going to be doing very well. The business down the road that does not discriminate is the one that will get the most business. Of course, that's my opinion, but you cannot legislate morality. And like I said, just how many businesses do you think would practice such AWFUL business sense? Not too many, I think.

 

[bripat9643]

Why can't you just say "blacks" or "African Americans" or something?

And no, black people were still discriminated against. Martin Luther King's peaceful protests are what more than likely changed a LOT of hearts and minds anyways. Laws do not change the way people FEEL.

Nobody can enforce what somebody feels. You can, however, use the law to make them behave fairly.

That isn't a legitimate purpose of law.

If everybody was conforming to the requirements out of choice, why would we ever need any law in the first place? Laws are to enforce compliance. Nothing else.

Again, you are talking about forcing people to conform to your views via the law. I'm sorry, but that is just not justifiable IMO. Forcing people to do things with threats is no way to change hearts and minds, that's for sure. It creates animosity and resentment.

You could be right. What do you think is the purpose of laws? You know you can't legislate beliefs or desires. All you can do is legislate behavior, and some won't like it no matter what the law is. Other than to define acceptable behavior, why do you think we have laws?

The purpose of laws is to protect you from predators, foreign and domestic. Any laws that don't have that as their sole purpose are illegitimate. Either a law protects your rights, or it violates them.

 

[ChrisL]

I don't know what ****** is. Lol. But no, it doesn't work obviously. That is why this is happening now. You cannot change the way people think and feel by making laws. People change because they become educated in the things they don't understand. Making laws that force them only makes them angry, and then we have this right here.

Isn't that the purpose for laws? If everybody wanted to do it anyway, there would be no need for any laws.

Businesses that refuse to cater to homosexuals, or anyone with MONEY, are going to be a HUGE minority in today's day and age.

ROFL! I hardly think so. The are less than 2% of the population, and they don't reproduce.

I'll repeat it for you since you completely misunderstood. I said BUSINESSES that refuse to cater to homosexuals are going to be a minority. In other words, there are not going to be many businesses that would refuse people's money, regardless of what they do in their bedroom.

MOST people don't really care about such things. Why YOU and others care so much about what a person does in the privacy of their bedroom is a complete mystery to me.

I only care when the government its prejudices onto people. That isn't freedom. It's tyranny.

Come on, dude. This isn't the only "gay" thread I've seen you participate in.

 

[YellowDogDemocrat]

Nobody can enforce what somebody feels. You can, however, use the law to make them behave fairly.

That isn't a legitimate purpose of law.

If everybody was conforming to the requirements out of choice, why would we ever need any law in the first place? Laws are to enforce compliance. Nothing else.

Again, you are talking about forcing people to conform to your views via the law. I'm sorry, but that is just not justifiable IMO. Forcing people to do things with threats is no way to change hearts and minds, that's for sure. It creates animosity and resentment.

You could be right. What do you think is the purpose of laws? You know you can't legislate beliefs or desires. All you can do is legislate behavior, and some won't like it no matter what the law is. Other than to define acceptable behavior, why do you think we have laws?

If you want to be an arse, there should not be laws against it. That is just silly, IMO. Like I said, capitalism would sort this out. Those businesses who refuse to do business with a person because of such silly reasons are not going to be doing very well. The business down the road that does not discriminate is the one that will get the most business. Of course, that's my opinion, but you cannot legislate morality. And like I said, just how many businesses do you think would practice such AWFUL business sense? Not too many, I think.

You mean like the cotton farmers sorted out who would own slaves?

 

[ChrisL]

That isn't a legitimate purpose of law.

If everybody was conforming to the requirements out of choice, why would we ever need any law in the first place? Laws are to enforce compliance. Nothing else.

Again, you are talking about forcing people to conform to your views via the law. I'm sorry, but that is just not justifiable IMO. Forcing people to do things with threats is no way to change hearts and minds, that's for sure. It creates animosity and resentment.

You could be right. What do you think is the purpose of laws? You know you can't legislate beliefs or desires. All you can do is legislate behavior, and some won't like it no matter what the law is. Other than to define acceptable behavior, why do you think we have laws?

If you want to be an arse, there should not be laws against it. That is just silly, IMO. Like I said, capitalism would sort this out. Those businesses who refuse to do business with a person because of such silly reasons are not going to be doing very well. The business down the road that does not discriminate is the one that will get the most business. Of course, that's my opinion, but you cannot legislate morality. And like I said, just how many businesses do you think would practice such AWFUL business sense? Not too many, I think.

You mean like the cotton farmers sorted out who would own slaves?

Now you are just being silly and hyperbolic.

 

[bripat9643]

That isn't a legitimate purpose of law.

If everybody was conforming to the requirements out of choice, why would we ever need any law in the first place? Laws are to enforce compliance. Nothing else.

Again, you are talking about forcing people to conform to your views via the law. I'm sorry, but that is just not justifiable IMO. Forcing people to do things with threats is no way to change hearts and minds, that's for sure. It creates animosity and resentment.

You could be right. What do you think is the purpose of laws? You know you can't legislate beliefs or desires. All you can do is legislate behavior, and some won't like it no matter what the law is. Other than to define acceptable behavior, why do you think we have laws?

If you want to be an arse, there should not be laws against it. That is just silly, IMO. Like I said, capitalism would sort this out. Those businesses who refuse to do business with a person because of such silly reasons are not going to be doing very well. The business down the road that does not discriminate is the one that will get the most business. Of course, that's my opinion, but you cannot legislate morality. And like I said, just how many businesses do you think would practice such AWFUL business sense? Not too many, I think.

You mean like the cotton farmers sorted out who would own slaves?

"YellowDogDemocrat" must be a euphemism meaning "certified idiot."

 

[ChrisL]

I am all FOR these businesses hanging out signs too, that they reserve the right to deny business to people based upon . . . whatever silly reason. Then, us more intelligent and open-minded people would choose to NOT do business with these people.

 

[bripat9643]

I am all FOR these businesses hanging out signs too, that they reserve the right to deny business to people based upon . . . whatever silly reason. Then, us more intelligent and open-minded people would choose to NOT do business with these people.

You agree they should be forced to hang out a sign like Jewish businesses were forced to hang out a sign in Nazi Germany?

 

[ChrisL]

Why can't you just say "blacks" or "African Americans" or something?

And no, black people were still discriminated against. Martin Luther King's peaceful protests are what more than likely changed a LOT of hearts and minds anyways. Laws do not change the way people FEEL.

Nobody can enforce what somebody feels. You can, however, use the law to make them behave fairly.

That isn't a legitimate purpose of law.

If everybody was conforming to the requirements out of choice, why would we ever need any law in the first place? Laws are to enforce compliance. Nothing else.

Again, you are talking about forcing people to conform to your views via the law. I'm sorry, but that is just not justifiable IMO. Forcing people to do things with threats is no way to change hearts and minds, that's for sure. It creates animosity and resentment.

I want the government OUT of my life and to not able force me to do anything, but that doesn't mean I condone bigotry. Why would anyone care if a person is gay? Why? I have yet to hear a good answer to that question. Who in the hell cares what other people do in their own bedroom? Who cares if they want to marry one another, as long as they are both adults capable of consenting to it? The world would be a better place if people could just mind their own damn business, IMO. There is absolutely no valid reason to so hate filled and intolerant, unless there is some type of abusive situation or people are getting hurt or killed. In that case, it's okay to be intolerant.

 

[ChrisL]

I am all FOR these businesses hanging out signs too, that they reserve the right to deny business to people based upon . . . whatever silly reason. Then, us more intelligent and open-minded people would choose to NOT do business with these people.

You agree they should be forced to hang out a sign like Jewish businesses were forced to hang out a sign in Nazi Germany?

Did I say forced? NO, I didn't. And as usual, your comparisons are absolutely stupid.

 

[YellowDogDemocrat]

If everybody was conforming to the requirements out of choice, why would we ever need any law in the first place? Laws are to enforce compliance. Nothing else.

Again, you are talking about forcing people to conform to your views via the law. I'm sorry, but that is just not justifiable IMO. Forcing people to do things with threats is no way to change hearts and minds, that's for sure. It creates animosity and resentment.

You could be right. What do you think is the purpose of laws? You know you can't legislate beliefs or desires. All you can do is legislate behavior, and some won't like it no matter what the law is. Other than to define acceptable behavior, why do you think we have laws?

If you want to be an arse, there should not be laws against it. That is just silly, IMO. Like I said, capitalism would sort this out. Those businesses who refuse to do business with a person because of such silly reasons are not going to be doing very well. The business down the road that does not discriminate is the one that will get the most business. Of course, that's my opinion, but you cannot legislate morality. And like I said, just how many businesses do you think would practice such AWFUL business sense? Not too many, I think.

You mean like the cotton farmers sorted out who would own slaves?

"YellowDogDemocrat" must be a euphemism meaning "certified idiot."

That's cute. Have you learned any big words yet?

 

[bripat9643]

I am all FOR these businesses hanging out signs too, that they reserve the right to deny business to people based upon . . . whatever silly reason. Then, us more intelligent and open-minded people would choose to NOT do business with these people.

You agree they should be forced to hang out a sign like Jewish businesses were forced to hang out a sign in Nazi Germany?

Did I say forced? NO, I didn't. And as usual, your comparisons are absolutely stupid.

If you want to force businesses to put such a sign on their window, then the comparison is exact.