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

[DiamondDave]

I can't wait until it goes to court

Why would it go to court?

it violates the 1964 civil rights act?

Civil rights act does not cover discrimination because of BEHAVIOR... gay is not a race or a sex..

Do I agree with treating people bad?? No.. Do I think it is smart business sense to not cater to gays? Nope.. but I am for freedom, and you have the freedom to be a jerk just as you have the freedom to be tolerant...

You should not be able to force a religious person or a person who does not agree with things such as homosexual BEHAVIOR to bake a penis cake, or film gays kissing, or whatever else.. the freedom of the service provider is not lesser than the freedom of the homosexual.. it is the same freedom

 

[bodecea]

Why would it go to court?

it violates the 1964 civil rights act?

Civil rights act does not cover discrimination because of BEHAVIOR... gay is not a race or a sex..

Do I agree with treating people bad?? No.. Do I think it is smart business sense to not cater to gays? Nope.. but I am for freedom, and you have the freedom to be a jerk just as you have the freedom to be tolerant...

You should not be able to force a religious person or a person who does not agree with things such as homosexual BEHAVIOR to bake a penis cake, or film gays kissing, or whatever else.. the freedom of the service provider is not lesser than the freedom of the homosexual.. it is the same freedom

Religion isn't a race or sex either. I look forward to these Arizona businesses not serving people of different religions, races, handicaps, etc. Well done, Zonies!

 

[R.D.]

it violates the 1964 civil rights act?

Civil rights act does not cover discrimination because of BEHAVIOR... gay is not a race or a sex..

Do I agree with treating people bad?? No.. Do I think it is smart business sense to not cater to gays? Nope.. but I am for freedom, and you have the freedom to be a jerk just as you have the freedom to be tolerant...

You should not be able to force a religious person or a person who does not agree with things such as homosexual BEHAVIOR to bake a penis cake, or film gays kissing, or whatever else.. the freedom of the service provider is not lesser than the freedom of the homosexual.. it is the same freedom

Religion isn't a race or sex either. I look forward to these Arizona businesses not serving people of different religions, races, handicaps, etc. Well done, Zonies!

No you don't because you know that's just fluff talk to try to get people on the defensive

You also are scared that this would not effect a business negatively. You're not even concerned with the fact other businesses can thrive due to this. You simply want everyone to tell you how great you are or suffer Never gonna happen

 

[DiamondDave]

it violates the 1964 civil rights act?

Civil rights act does not cover discrimination because of BEHAVIOR... gay is not a race or a sex..

Do I agree with treating people bad?? No.. Do I think it is smart business sense to not cater to gays? Nope.. but I am for freedom, and you have the freedom to be a jerk just as you have the freedom to be tolerant...

You should not be able to force a religious person or a person who does not agree with things such as homosexual BEHAVIOR to bake a penis cake, or film gays kissing, or whatever else.. the freedom of the service provider is not lesser than the freedom of the homosexual.. it is the same freedom

Religion isn't a race or sex either. I look forward to these Arizona businesses not serving people of different religions, races, handicaps, etc. Well done, Zonies!

Stated this before.. I don't care if you refuse to cater a jewish wedding or a christian funeral or whatever else...

Your point is?

 

[jknowgood]

Republicans, fighting on the side of discrimination

You never answered the question, can a black baker be forced to make a confederate flag cake? A gay baker make a anti gay cake for a straight person? So now if a white girl wants to enter miss black america, she can now?

 

[Camp]

The fact that we even have a law, or debate the legailty of freedom of association is pathetic in a supposedly free country. A business owner, in any state, for any reason, should be allowed to determine who they will provide services to.

But, LOLberals just love the idea of forcing people to do what they believe is right.

You have it backwards. The voting public determines who is allowed to operate commercial business and the rules and regulations they are required to follow to operate such endeavor. This is done to protect the consumer, the customer and promote the general welfare. The voters get to decide what protections are needed. It's called democracy. The thing you are promoting is called anarchy. Anarchy is not the same as democracy.

 

[DiamondDave]

The fact that we even have a law, or debate the legailty of freedom of association is pathetic in a supposedly free country. A business owner, in any state, for any reason, should be allowed to determine who they will provide services to.

But, LOLberals just love the idea of forcing people to do what they believe is right.

You have it backwards. The voting public determines who is allowed to operate commercial business and the rules and regulations they are required to follow to operate such endeavor. This is done to protect the consumer, the customer and promote the general welfare. The voters get to decide what protections are needed. It's called democracy. The thing you are promoting is called anarchy. Anarchy is not the same as democracy.

No they do not.. and we don't have a democracy... democracy breeds the mob rule you so crave (well, when it suits your agenda).... We have a republic.. where rule of law matters above popular whim.. and a republic based on preserving freedom is not anarchy

 

[TakeAStepBack]

The fact that we even have a law, or debate the legailty of freedom of association is pathetic in a supposedly free country. A business owner, in any state, for any reason, should be allowed to determine who they will provide services to.

But, LOLberals just love the idea of forcing people to do what they believe is right.

You have it backwards. The voting public determines who is allowed to operate commercial business and the rules and regulations they are required to follow to operate such endeavor. This is done to protect the consumer, the customer and promote the general welfare. The voters get to decide what protections are needed. It's called democracy. The thing you are promoting is called anarchy. Anarchy is not the same as democracy.

No, you have it backwards. There is nothing free in a society dictated by majority rule over your private property and person. The thing you are promoting is tyranny by "majority". OK, not actually a majority, just a majority of little dictators. What you are promoting here is called tyranny. Tyranny is not the same as freedom.

 

[emilynghiem]

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 don't agree with wording the language to target gays, blacks, Jews etc.
I agree with the "freedom of association" idea to keep it NONSPECIFIC; or maybe advise business owners in how to advertise their focus to form an agreement with the community where these limits are understood and respected.
====================
I once made the mistake of bringing a "male feminist" to an all women's group, and he had to be escorted out. The founder explained because there were rape victims in the group, some could only handle being in the company of women, so the group was restricted for their protection to come in anytime and know they would feel safe. So there was a process where he was pulled aside so this could be explained diplomatically. Why can't all groups be that way? Why can't we train people to respect that people have preferences and limits.
==================================

Another case where I thought the wording should be NONSPECIFIC:

The policy change executed directly by Mayor Parker in Houston was to extend city employee benefits to recognize same sex marriage partners the same as heterosexual marriage partners.

In order not to impose either pro-gay or anti-gay agenda in public policy,
the wording should be VOTED on where it is NEUTRAL, such as allowing city employees
to designate ONE beneficiary adult and maybe TWO children/minors/dependents.

So that way it isn't targeting any group bias or label or excluding any.

Just ONE adult/independent beneficiary and up to TWO dependents such as children, elderly, etc. who can be added to one's insurance policy, without specifying.

NOTE: if this does not work, maybe this shows why insurance should remain PRIVATE and not through employers or govt if it causes imposition of either progay or antigay.

The market is open for insurance companies who want to recognize partners
or leave the beneficiary open to whomever the buyer WANTS to add to their policy.

If you can make this work, go for it. But quit forcing it under govt to begin with,
and then trying to legislate from there. Keep it private and we don't have this problem.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

The fact that we even have a law, or debate the legailty of freedom of association is pathetic in a supposedly free country. A business owner, in any state, for any reason, should be allowed to determine who they will provide services to.

But, LOLberals just love the idea of forcing people to do what they believe is right.

The thing you are promoting is called anarchy. Anarchy is not the same as democracy.

I don't think so. Wether you like it or not, we do have Religiously Rights in this country. It is outlined in the Constitution. Unfortunately, those Religious Rights are being discriminated against by gay activst groups, the ones who are being the true anarchists. Gay activsts did try to shut down Chic Fil A simply because the owner expressed a different opinion, and Chic Fil A won.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Civil rights act does not cover discrimination because of BEHAVIOR... gay is not a race or a sex..

Speaking from a legal aspect, sure it does. Religion is a BEHAVIOR... religion is not a race or a sex...


>>>>

 

[DiamondDave]

Civil rights act does not cover discrimination because of BEHAVIOR... gay is not a race or a sex..

Speaking from a legal aspect, sure it does. Religion is a BEHAVIOR... religion is not a race or a sex...


>>>>

And I agree with that... IMHO, it is not in need of protecting except for your freedom to practice it.. not forcing others to help you practice part of it, I.E. weddings etc

 

[Contumacious]

I can't wait until it goes to court

Why would it go to court?

it violates the 1964 civil rights act?

Doesn't the "1964 civil rights act" violates the US Constitution (1787)?

.

 

[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

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.

 

[Contumacious]

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

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 Law gives the business owner discretion.

I do not believe that the typical business owner is going to refuse service to anyone unless he believes that the majority of patrons dislike whatever is it that you are doing.

Economics will prevent merchants from arbitrarily enforcing this right.

.

 

[WorldWatcher]

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

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.


>>>>

 

[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

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 Law gives the business owner discretion.

I do not believe that the typical business owner is going to refuse service to anyone unless he believes that the majority of patrons dislike whatever is it that you are doing.

Economics will prevent merchants from arbitrarily enforcing this right.

.

So give 'em the right to refuse service for french kissing in public. You can't make a law against something that you don't know unless they tell or show you.

 

[Contumacious]

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 Law gives the business owner discretion.

I do not believe that the typical business owner is going to refuse service to anyone unless he believes that the majority of patrons dislike whatever is it that you are doing.

Economics will prevent merchants from arbitrarily enforcing this right.

.

So give 'em the right to refuse service for french kissing in public. You can't make a law against something that you don't know unless they tell or show you.

Do they own the Establishment?

Can they set their own rules?

If whatever you are doing clashes with the ambiance they want to create then you should leave.

Just like a business called the "Blue Boy" Lounge or Lesbians R Us have the right to cater to those who subscribe to those tendencies.

.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Why would it go to court?

it violates the 1964 civil rights act?

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.

Steve i believe that sign comes with certain rules and stipulations.......
they have the right to refuse service to anyone so they are able to get rid of guests who cause problems. This allows them to ask guests who are disturbing others to leave. They can ask anyone to leave if they see a reason for it.
but they can't discriminate based on race, sex, nationality, religion, etc. of the patron.

 

[Contumacious]

it violates the 1964 civil rights act?

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.

Steve i believe that sign comes with certain rules and stipulations.......
they have the right to refuse service to anyone so they are able to get rid of guests who cause problems. This allows them to ask guests who are disturbing others to leave. They can ask anyone to leave if they see a reason for it.
but they can't discriminate based on race, sex, nationality, religion, etc. of the patron.

Why is that?

Why can't the KKK Bar nor the Black Panther Saloon decide who is going to patronize their respective joints ?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!!?

.