The videographers must shoot the video

[TNHarley]

So this suit is all pretty much hypothetical, over whether the videographers can include on their website the helpful information that they will not video gay couples' weddings. I can see both sides here. Putting up a clear statement that you are going to discriminate is going to get you in a shitload of trouble with the law, but it is helpful for potential customers.
When some of those discriminatory laws in NC were adopted, businesses that welcomed gay couples started putting up signs saying "ALL are welcome here." Maybe if more businesses that have no problem with gays were to do that--all of them--like the ubiquitous signs everywhere that say "We Accept VISA," customers would know who to choose and perhaps those who are not ready to accept gay marriage could be given some more time.
I hate discrimination personally, but not everyone objecting to this is a hateful bigot. They need more time to accept an unprecedented change in thinking about homosexuality in the past forty years. It happened so fast people's thinking couldn't keep up. Forcing it is like putting my cat in the carrier. The more you force it, the more she fights. Can a solution somewhere near the middle be found?

Sadly, it does get you in trouble with the law. As long as someone else's rights aren't getting trampled on, people have the right to be bigots.
If if there is an acceptable middle road honestly. Either you have freedom to be who you are or you dont.
The people socially assassinating these people would be better than using the govt. It's still intolerant but at least big brother isn't gaining more power.

Maybe we are almost agreeing on something here? But I can't understand what you're saying. Is it real busy at work this a.m.?

We kind of are you just seem more willing than I lol.
It's this new phone. Buttons are small and I never proof read. Big hands too

 

[HappyJoy]

So this suit is all pretty much hypothetical, over whether the videographers can include on their website the helpful information that they will not video gay couples' weddings. I can see both sides here. Putting up a clear statement that you are going to discriminate is going to get you in a shitload of trouble with the law, but it is helpful for potential customers.
When some of those discriminatory laws in NC were adopted, businesses that welcomed gay couples started putting up signs saying "ALL are welcome here." Maybe if more businesses that have no problem with gays were to do that--all of them--like the ubiquitous signs everywhere that say "We Accept VISA," customers would know who to choose and perhaps those who are not ready to accept gay marriage could be given some more time.
I hate discrimination personally, but not everyone objecting to this is a hateful bigot. They need more time to accept an unprecedented change in thinking about homosexuality in the past forty years. It happened so fast people's thinking couldn't keep up. Forcing it is like putting my cat in the carrier. The more you force it, the more she fights. Can a solution somewhere near the middle be found?

In other words discrimination should be legal because at least in theory someone else will serve them? I think we had that before the 1964 civil rights act.

 

[TNHarley]

So this suit is all pretty much hypothetical, over whether the videographers can include on their website the helpful information that they will not video gay couples' weddings. I can see both sides here. Putting up a clear statement that you are going to discriminate is going to get you in a shitload of trouble with the law, but it is helpful for potential customers.
When some of those discriminatory laws in NC were adopted, businesses that welcomed gay couples started putting up signs saying "ALL are welcome here." Maybe if more businesses that have no problem with gays were to do that--all of them--like the ubiquitous signs everywhere that say "We Accept VISA," customers would know who to choose and perhaps those who are not ready to accept gay marriage could be given some more time.
I hate discrimination personally, but not everyone objecting to this is a hateful bigot. They need more time to accept an unprecedented change in thinking about homosexuality in the past forty years. It happened so fast people's thinking couldn't keep up. Forcing it is like putting my cat in the carrier. The more you force it, the more she fights. Can a solution somewhere near the middle be found?

In other words, discrimination should be legal because at least in theory, someone else will serve them? I think we had that before the 1964 civil rights act.

PA laws are discrimination too.
You just another one that supports your own kind of discrimination?

 

[HappyJoy]

So this suit is all pretty much hypothetical, over whether the videographers can include on their website the helpful information that they will not video gay couples' weddings. I can see both sides here. Putting up a clear statement that you are going to discriminate is going to get you in a shitload of trouble with the law, but it is helpful for potential customers.
When some of those discriminatory laws in NC were adopted, businesses that welcomed gay couples started putting up signs saying "ALL are welcome here." Maybe if more businesses that have no problem with gays were to do that--all of them--like the ubiquitous signs everywhere that say "We Accept VISA," customers would know who to choose and perhaps those who are not ready to accept gay marriage could be given some more time.
I hate discrimination personally, but not everyone objecting to this is a hateful bigot. They need more time to accept an unprecedented change in thinking about homosexuality in the past forty years. It happened so fast people's thinking couldn't keep up. Forcing it is like putting my cat in the carrier. The more you force it, the more she fights. Can a solution somewhere near the middle be found?

In other words, discrimination should be legal because at least in theory, someone else will serve them? I think we had that before the 1964 civil rights act.

PA laws are discrimination too.
You just another one that supports your own kind of discrimination?

They aren't discrimination, but it's a great talking point.

 

[TNHarley]

So this suit is all pretty much hypothetical, over whether the videographers can include on their website the helpful information that they will not video gay couples' weddings. I can see both sides here. Putting up a clear statement that you are going to discriminate is going to get you in a shitload of trouble with the law, but it is helpful for potential customers.
When some of those discriminatory laws in NC were adopted, businesses that welcomed gay couples started putting up signs saying "ALL are welcome here." Maybe if more businesses that have no problem with gays were to do that--all of them--like the ubiquitous signs everywhere that say "We Accept VISA," customers would know who to choose and perhaps those who are not ready to accept gay marriage could be given some more time.
I hate discrimination personally, but not everyone objecting to this is a hateful bigot. They need more time to accept an unprecedented change in thinking about homosexuality in the past forty years. It happened so fast people's thinking couldn't keep up. Forcing it is like putting my cat in the carrier. The more you force it, the more she fights. Can a solution somewhere near the middle be found?

In other words, discrimination should be legal because at least in theory, someone else will serve them? I think we had that before the 1964 civil rights act.

PA laws are discrimination too.
You just another one that supports your own kind of discrimination?

They aren't discrimination, but it's a great talking point.

Indeed. Forcing people to put forth their time and private property against their will because of beliefs isn't discrimination.
Excellent. Thanks.
Be sure and call Webster so he can change the definition of the word.

 

[HappyJoy]

So this suit is all pretty much hypothetical, over whether the videographers can include on their website the helpful information that they will not video gay couples' weddings. I can see both sides here. Putting up a clear statement that you are going to discriminate is going to get you in a shitload of trouble with the law, but it is helpful for potential customers.
When some of those discriminatory laws in NC were adopted, businesses that welcomed gay couples started putting up signs saying "ALL are welcome here." Maybe if more businesses that have no problem with gays were to do that--all of them--like the ubiquitous signs everywhere that say "We Accept VISA," customers would know who to choose and perhaps those who are not ready to accept gay marriage could be given some more time.
I hate discrimination personally, but not everyone objecting to this is a hateful bigot. They need more time to accept an unprecedented change in thinking about homosexuality in the past forty years. It happened so fast people's thinking couldn't keep up. Forcing it is like putting my cat in the carrier. The more you force it, the more she fights. Can a solution somewhere near the middle be found?

In other words, discrimination should be legal because at least in theory, someone else will serve them? I think we had that before the 1964 civil rights act.

PA laws are discrimination too.
You just another one that supports your own kind of discrimination?

They aren't discrimination, but it's a great talking point.

Indeed. Forcing people to put forth their time and private property against their will because of beliefs isn't discrimination.
Excellent. Thanks.
Be sure and call Webster so he can change the definition of the word.

Everybody has to follow the same laws, therefore not discrimination.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The 13th Amendment abolished slavery and involuntary servitude. So far as I know, it is still in effect.

That argument was put forth in Heart of Atlanta Motel, Incorporated v. United States, it didn't fly as opening a business is a voluntary action and choosing what services or goods to offer is also a voluntary action. Public Accommodation laws that don't allow busineses to refuse black people, Jews, Mexicans, the elderly, women, veterans, or divorced people are not slavery laws.


>>>>

 

[OldLady]

So this suit is all pretty much hypothetical, over whether the videographers can include on their website the helpful information that they will not video gay couples' weddings. I can see both sides here. Putting up a clear statement that you are going to discriminate is going to get you in a shitload of trouble with the law, but it is helpful for potential customers.
When some of those discriminatory laws in NC were adopted, businesses that welcomed gay couples started putting up signs saying "ALL are welcome here." Maybe if more businesses that have no problem with gays were to do that--all of them--like the ubiquitous signs everywhere that say "We Accept VISA," customers would know who to choose and perhaps those who are not ready to accept gay marriage could be given some more time.
I hate discrimination personally, but not everyone objecting to this is a hateful bigot. They need more time to accept an unprecedented change in thinking about homosexuality in the past forty years. It happened so fast people's thinking couldn't keep up. Forcing it is like putting my cat in the carrier. The more you force it, the more she fights. Can a solution somewhere near the middle be found?

In other words discrimination should be legal because at least in theory someone else will serve them? I think we had that before the 1964 civil rights act.

I know. You're not wrong. I don't know the answer; I know my compromise isn't perfect.

 

[TNHarley]

So this suit is all pretty much hypothetical, over whether the videographers can include on their website the helpful information that they will not video gay couples' weddings. I can see both sides here. Putting up a clear statement that you are going to discriminate is going to get you in a shitload of trouble with the law, but it is helpful for potential customers.
When some of those discriminatory laws in NC were adopted, businesses that welcomed gay couples started putting up signs saying "ALL are welcome here." Maybe if more businesses that have no problem with gays were to do that--all of them--like the ubiquitous signs everywhere that say "We Accept VISA," customers would know who to choose and perhaps those who are not ready to accept gay marriage could be given some more time.
I hate discrimination personally, but not everyone objecting to this is a hateful bigot. They need more time to accept an unprecedented change in thinking about homosexuality in the past forty years. It happened so fast people's thinking couldn't keep up. Forcing it is like putting my cat in the carrier. The more you force it, the more she fights. Can a solution somewhere near the middle be found?

In other words, discrimination should be legal because at least in theory, someone else will serve them? I think we had that before the 1964 civil rights act.

PA laws are discrimination too.
You just another one that supports your own kind of discrimination?

They aren't discrimination, but it's a great talking point.

Indeed. Forcing people to put forth their time and private property against their will because of beliefs isn't discrimination.
Excellent. Thanks.
Be sure and call Webster so he can change the definition of the word.

Everybody has to follow the same laws, therefore not discrimination.

LOL oh wow

 

[HappyJoy]

So this suit is all pretty much hypothetical, over whether the videographers can include on their website the helpful information that they will not video gay couples' weddings. I can see both sides here. Putting up a clear statement that you are going to discriminate is going to get you in a shitload of trouble with the law, but it is helpful for potential customers.
When some of those discriminatory laws in NC were adopted, businesses that welcomed gay couples started putting up signs saying "ALL are welcome here." Maybe if more businesses that have no problem with gays were to do that--all of them--like the ubiquitous signs everywhere that say "We Accept VISA," customers would know who to choose and perhaps those who are not ready to accept gay marriage could be given some more time.
I hate discrimination personally, but not everyone objecting to this is a hateful bigot. They need more time to accept an unprecedented change in thinking about homosexuality in the past forty years. It happened so fast people's thinking couldn't keep up. Forcing it is like putting my cat in the carrier. The more you force it, the more she fights. Can a solution somewhere near the middle be found?

In other words discrimination should be legal because at least in theory someone else will serve them? I think we had that before the 1964 civil rights act.

I know. You're not wrong. I don't know the answer; I know my compromise isn't perfect.

I don't think there is a compromise and I'm not against the right and left working together. However, either we treat each other equally or we don't.

 

[BluesLegend]

I'd shoot the video and forget to take the lens cap off, ooops my bad.

 

[HappyJoy]

In other words, discrimination should be legal because at least in theory, someone else will serve them? I think we had that before the 1964 civil rights act.

PA laws are discrimination too.
You just another one that supports your own kind of discrimination?

They aren't discrimination, but it's a great talking point.

Indeed. Forcing people to put forth their time and private property against their will because of beliefs isn't discrimination.
Excellent. Thanks.
Be sure and call Webster so he can change the definition of the word.

Everybody has to follow the same laws, therefore not discrimination.

LOL oh wow

I know, I expected you not to have much to say either.

 

[TNHarley]

PA laws are discrimination too.
You just another one that supports your own kind of discrimination?

They aren't discrimination, but it's a great talking point.

Indeed. Forcing people to put forth their time and private property against their will because of beliefs isn't discrimination.
Excellent. Thanks.
Be sure and call Webster so he can change the definition of the word.

Everybody has to follow the same laws, therefore not discrimination.

LOL oh wow

I know, I expected you not to have much to say either.

What should i say? You are a biased idiot that cant see past your tunnel vision?

 

[HappyJoy]

I'd shoot the video and forget to take the lens cap off, ooops my bad.

Yeah, you totally won't get sued for that.

 

[BluesLegend]

I'd shoot the video and forget to take the lens cap off, ooops my bad.

Yeah, you totally won't get sued for that.

For what? Calling in sick the morning of?

 

[HappyJoy]

They aren't discrimination, but it's a great talking point.

Indeed. Forcing people to put forth their time and private property against their will because of beliefs isn't discrimination.
Excellent. Thanks.
Be sure and call Webster so he can change the definition of the word.

Everybody has to follow the same laws, therefore not discrimination.

LOL oh wow

I know, I expected you not to have much to say either.

What should i say? You are a biased idiot that cant see past your tunnel vision?

And once again, you are unable to explain your point of view.

 

[HappyJoy]

I'd shoot the video and forget to take the lens cap off, ooops my bad.

Yeah, you totally won't get sued for that.

For what?

For being incompetent.

 

[TNHarley]

Indeed. Forcing people to put forth their time and private property against their will because of beliefs isn't discrimination.
Excellent. Thanks.
Be sure and call Webster so he can change the definition of the word.

Everybody has to follow the same laws, therefore not discrimination.

LOL oh wow

I know, I expected you not to have much to say either.

What should i say? You are a biased idiot that cant see past your tunnel vision?

And once again, you are unable to explain your point of view.

I already did. I always have to repeat to partisan shitheads
The people are being FORCED to use their time and private property because of something they believe in. Thats discrimination against THEM

 

[HappyJoy]

Everybody has to follow the same laws, therefore not discrimination.

LOL oh wow

I know, I expected you not to have much to say either.

What should i say? You are a biased idiot that cant see past your tunnel vision?

And once again, you are unable to explain your point of view.

I already did. I always have to repeat to partisan shitheads
The people are being FORCED to use their time and private property because of something they believe in. Thats discrimination against THEM

Nope, you merely called PA laws discriminatory, you didn't explain why other than your fee fees.

 

[TNHarley]

LOL oh wow

I know, I expected you not to have much to say either.

What should i say? You are a biased idiot that cant see past your tunnel vision?

And once again, you are unable to explain your point of view.

I already did. I always have to repeat to partisan shitheads
The people are being FORCED to use their time and private property because of something they believe in. Thats discrimination against THEM

Nope, you merely called PA laws discriminatory, you didn't explain why other than your fee fees.

OMG lol have a good weekend!