Senator Marco Rubio: It's Constitutionally Valid To Refuse Services To Gay Marriages (He's Right)

[norwegen]

The people's rights come before a business's rights IMO

Hey, a disconnect.

A business is no less a person's property than a t-shirt is. Which means, of course, that you Progressives soon will be telling us what to do with our t-shirts, doesn't it.

 

[initforme]

I love the conflict this has become. Its fun to watch all the heated debate over it. Indiana is now on the map and relevant. Gotta love it.

 

[The Rabbi]

Why?

Try to make a valid argument that a business (regardless if it's one person) has rights before the individual citizen does.

here's a few ill just throw out:

1) the business owner simply doesnt want to - baseless discrimination
2) against the business owner's religion/beliefs - the government is not affiliated with any religion or ideology (besides 'liberty and democracy' i guess) and is not allowed to pass legislation that favors any religion or belief system.

The business owner is an individual citizen. They don't lose their rights as a citizen because they own a business. There is a balance between the rights of the consumer and the rights of the business and the consumer does not automatically win. There has to be a valid reason.

exactly, there has to be a valid reason that you're denying someone service. and their race, gender, religion, and sexuality are not valid reasons.

So tell me, what is the compelling reason to force a photographer to take pictures of a wedding?

There is none, however there is compelling reason to force the photographer to give them an estimate/review of their wedding.

BTW, you example #2 is flat wrong. The government can't enforce religion or favor one religion over another, but it can certainly pass legislation in favor of religion in general. That, in fact, is what the first amendment does.

protecting freedom of religion isn't supporting religion, it's supporting individual rights. that's what the first amendment does.

What is the compelling reason for an estimate?

There is no reason to not give them an estimate. However there are various reasons to not actually give them a shoot; location and price differences come off the top of my head.

There is a very valid reason not to give an estimate: You dont want the job. Ergo an estimate is simply a waste of time.
You havent thought very hard about this, have you?

 

[g5000]

 

[The Rabbi]

That was even less coherent than your normal posts.

 

[lake avenue]

The people's rights come before a business's rights IMO

Hey, a disconnect.

A business is no less a person's property than a t-shirt is. Which means, of course, that you Progressives soon will be telling us what to do with our t-shirts, doesn't it.

I'm not a progressive so I wouldn't know.

 

[g5000]

That was even less coherent than your normal posts.

2000
BRIDE: I would like to order a cake. I'm marrying the most wonderful man in the world!

BAKER: Congratulations! What kind of wedding cake would you like?


2008

BRIDE: I would like to order a cake. I'm getting married again! The last guy turned out to be a total flake, but this one is Mr. Right.

BAKER: Congratulations! What kind of wedding cake would you like?


2014

BRIDE: I would like to order a cake. I'm getting married again! Third time's the charm!

BAKER: Congratulations! What kind of wedding cake would you like?


2015

HOMO: I would like to order a cake. I'm marrying the most wonderful man in the world!

BAKER: Get out of here you unholy piece of garbage! My cakes are for traditional, biblical marriages!

 

[lake avenue]

Try to make a valid argument that a business (regardless if it's one person) has rights before the individual citizen does.

here's a few ill just throw out:

1) the business owner simply doesnt want to - baseless discrimination
2) against the business owner's religion/beliefs - the government is not affiliated with any religion or ideology (besides 'liberty and democracy' i guess) and is not allowed to pass legislation that favors any religion or belief system.

The business owner is an individual citizen. They don't lose their rights as a citizen because they own a business. There is a balance between the rights of the consumer and the rights of the business and the consumer does not automatically win. There has to be a valid reason.

exactly, there has to be a valid reason that you're denying someone service. and their race, gender, religion, and sexuality are not valid reasons.

So tell me, what is the compelling reason to force a photographer to take pictures of a wedding?

There is none, however there is compelling reason to force the photographer to give them an estimate/review of their wedding.

BTW, you example #2 is flat wrong. The government can't enforce religion or favor one religion over another, but it can certainly pass legislation in favor of religion in general. That, in fact, is what the first amendment does.

protecting freedom of religion isn't supporting religion, it's supporting individual rights. that's what the first amendment does.

Denying a service to those acting on a sexuality -- per religious beliefs -- is legit. Denying service to an acknowledged pedophile is the same thing.

Denying a service to those acting on christianity -- per religious beliefs -- is legit. Denying service to an acknowledged white person is the same thing.

see how that statement doesn't make an argument? it kinda just says something without backing. That's your logic, only changing two words. and it's shit. make an argument.

I could change the two words to murderer and woman and it would as much lack sense as your attempt.
Skin color and gender are not ideologies or behavior choices.

neither is homosexuality.

 

[The Rabbi]

That was even less coherent than your normal posts.

2000
BRIDE: I would like to order a cake. I'm marrying the most wonderful man in the world!

BAKER: Congratulations! What kind of wedding cake would you like?


2008

BRIDE: I would like to order a cake. I'm getting married again! The last guy turned out to be a total flake, but this one is Mr. Right.

BAKER: Congratulations! What kind of wedding cake would you like?


2014

BRIDE: I would like to order a cake. I'm getting married again! Third time's the charm!

BAKER: Congratulations! What kind of wedding cake would you like?


2015

HOMO: I would like to order a cake. I'm marrying the most wonderful man in the world!

BAKER: Get out of here you unholy piece of garbage! My cakes are for traditional, biblical marriages!

Was there some kind of fucking point in that pile of worthless dog shit you just posted? I mean, anything. If you want to prove you're a brainless idiot there's no need.

 

[lake avenue]

That was even less coherent than your normal posts.

2000
BRIDE: I would like to order a cake. I'm marrying the most wonderful man in the world!

BAKER: Congratulations! What kind of wedding cake would you like?


2008

BRIDE: I would like to order a cake. I'm getting married again! The last guy turned out to be a total flake, but this one is Mr. Right.

BAKER: Congratulations! What kind of wedding cake would you like?


2014

BRIDE: I would like to order a cake. I'm getting married again! Third time's the charm!

BAKER: Congratulations! What kind of wedding cake would you like?


2015

HOMO: I would like to order a cake. I'm marrying the most wonderful man in the world!

BAKER: Get out of here you unholy piece of garbage! My cakes are for traditional, biblical marriages!

but marrying a woman three times isn't against the bib- oh wait

 

[The Rabbi]

That was even less coherent than your normal posts.

2000
BRIDE: I would like to order a cake. I'm marrying the most wonderful man in the world!

BAKER: Congratulations! What kind of wedding cake would you like?


2008

BRIDE: I would like to order a cake. I'm getting married again! The last guy turned out to be a total flake, but this one is Mr. Right.

BAKER: Congratulations! What kind of wedding cake would you like?


2014

BRIDE: I would like to order a cake. I'm getting married again! Third time's the charm!

BAKER: Congratulations! What kind of wedding cake would you like?


2015

HOMO: I would like to order a cake. I'm marrying the most wonderful man in the world!

BAKER: Get out of here you unholy piece of garbage! My cakes are for traditional, biblical marriages!

but marrying a woman three times isn't against the bib- oh wait

Sorry but died and made you Pope?

 

[kiwiman127]

"Was there some kind of fucking point in that pile of worthless dog shit you just posted? I mean, anything. If you want to prove you're a brainless idiot there's no need."-Rabbi

Talking to yourself and about yourself again? Dumbshit.

 

[The Rabbi]

"Was there some kind of fucking point in that pile of worthless dog shit you just posted? I mean, anything. If you want to prove you're a brainless idiot there's no need."-Rabbi

Talking to yourself and about yourself again? Dumbshit.

Butt hurt much? Please post a graph so I can pwn you again.

 

[lake avenue]

That was even less coherent than your normal posts.

2000
BRIDE: I would like to order a cake. I'm marrying the most wonderful man in the world!

BAKER: Congratulations! What kind of wedding cake would you like?


2008

BRIDE: I would like to order a cake. I'm getting married again! The last guy turned out to be a total flake, but this one is Mr. Right.

BAKER: Congratulations! What kind of wedding cake would you like?


2014

BRIDE: I would like to order a cake. I'm getting married again! Third time's the charm!

BAKER: Congratulations! What kind of wedding cake would you like?


2015

HOMO: I would like to order a cake. I'm marrying the most wonderful man in the world!

BAKER: Get out of here you unholy piece of garbage! My cakes are for traditional, biblical marriages!

but marrying a woman three times isn't against the bib- oh wait

Sorry but died and made you Pope?

nobody, but that doesn't mean I can't read the bible you fucking retard.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

The business owner is an individual citizen. They don't lose their rights as a citizen because they own a business. There is a balance between the rights of the consumer and the rights of the business and the consumer does not automatically win. There has to be a valid reason.

exactly, there has to be a valid reason that you're denying someone service. and their race, gender, religion, and sexuality are not valid reasons.

So tell me, what is the compelling reason to force a photographer to take pictures of a wedding?

There is none, however there is compelling reason to force the photographer to give them an estimate/review of their wedding.

BTW, you example #2 is flat wrong. The government can't enforce religion or favor one religion over another, but it can certainly pass legislation in favor of religion in general. That, in fact, is what the first amendment does.

protecting freedom of religion isn't supporting religion, it's supporting individual rights. that's what the first amendment does.

Denying a service to those acting on a sexuality -- per religious beliefs -- is legit. Denying service to an acknowledged pedophile is the same thing.

Denying a service to those acting on christianity -- per religious beliefs -- is legit. Denying service to an acknowledged white person is the same thing.

see how that statement doesn't make an argument? it kinda just says something without backing. That's your logic, only changing two words. and it's shit. make an argument.

I could change the two words to murderer and woman and it would as much lack sense as your attempt.
Skin color and gender are not ideologies or behavior choices.

neither is homosexuality.

Homosexuality is nothing but a behavior.

 

[lake avenue]

exactly, there has to be a valid reason that you're denying someone service. and their race, gender, religion, and sexuality are not valid reasons.

There is none, however there is compelling reason to force the photographer to give them an estimate/review of their wedding.
protecting freedom of religion isn't supporting religion, it's supporting individual rights. that's what the first amendment does.

Denying a service to those acting on a sexuality -- per religious beliefs -- is legit. Denying service to an acknowledged pedophile is the same thing.

Denying a service to those acting on christianity -- per religious beliefs -- is legit. Denying service to an acknowledged white person is the same thing.

see how that statement doesn't make an argument? it kinda just says something without backing. That's your logic, only changing two words. and it's shit. make an argument.

I could change the two words to murderer and woman and it would as much lack sense as your attempt.
Skin color and gender are not ideologies or behavior choices.

neither is homosexuality.

Homosexuality is nothing but a behavior.

The same goes to everything humans do.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Denying a service to those acting on a sexuality -- per religious beliefs -- is legit. Denying service to an acknowledged pedophile is the same thing.

Denying a service to those acting on christianity -- per religious beliefs -- is legit. Denying service to an acknowledged white person is the same thing.

see how that statement doesn't make an argument? it kinda just says something without backing. That's your logic, only changing two words. and it's shit. make an argument.

I could change the two words to murderer and woman and it would as much lack sense as your attempt.
Skin color and gender are not ideologies or behavior choices.

neither is homosexuality.

Homosexuality is nothing but a behavior.

The same goes to everything humans do.

Right. Keyword, 'do'. Not 'are' which is what the homofascist agenda uses to try to confuse the issue when they try to compare with race and gender.

 

[lake avenue]

Denying a service to those acting on christianity -- per religious beliefs -- is legit. Denying service to an acknowledged white person is the same thing.

see how that statement doesn't make an argument? it kinda just says something without backing. That's your logic, only changing two words. and it's shit. make an argument.

I could change the two words to murderer and woman and it would as much lack sense as your attempt.
Skin color and gender are not ideologies or behavior choices.

neither is homosexuality.

Homosexuality is nothing but a behavior.

The same goes to everything humans do.

Right. Keyword, 'do'. Not 'are' which is what the homofascist agenda uses to try to confuse the issue when they try to compare with race and gender.

What the fuck?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I could change the two words to murderer and woman and it would as much lack sense as your attempt.
Skin color and gender are not ideologies or behavior choices.

neither is homosexuality.

Homosexuality is nothing but a behavior.

The same goes to everything humans do.

Right. Keyword, 'do'. Not 'are' which is what the homofascist agenda uses to try to confuse the issue when they try to compare with race and gender.

What the fuck?

That explains a lot.
I can't be any more specific, descriptive or accurate so you're on your own.

 

[lake avenue]

neither is homosexuality.

Homosexuality is nothing but a behavior.

The same goes to everything humans do.

Right. Keyword, 'do'. Not 'are' which is what the homofascist agenda uses to try to confuse the issue when they try to compare with race and gender.

What the fuck?

That explains a lot.
I can't be any more specific, descriptive or accurate so you're on your own.

You could start with explaining where the duck fuck a "homofascist agenda" entered this discussion. Hey I might have missed something, im pretty tired honestly.