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

[Silhouette]

You should run on that. Sounds like a winning Message.

Discrimination IS OK!

Church of LGBT hyperbole aside, discrimination IS OK when it comes to behaviors. We do it all the time in civil and penal codes across the country. Unless of course you're talking about elevating a cult above the law?

 

[paperview]

1. Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.

2. They demand to have jobs teaching kids (telling them homosexuality is normal), serve in the military (showering with heterosexuals), play football with heterosexuals (grabbing them, tackling them), engaging in queer sex (guys kissing each other ) in public, etc. They also change the English language (having ruined a wonderful English word > "gay" which I refuse to use to describe queers)

3. Who said I want to see their perversions ? I certainly don't.

The curriculum sets what is taught to all the kids.
"play football, tackling, grabbing them".
LOL, dude I played 14 seasons of football and there were gay guys then and now.

"Curriculum" my ass. I had queer teachers in college and they lauded the homosexual lifestyle every day.

You asked me how queers impose their perversions. There's a queer dude, right now, who wants to be an NFL defensive tackle. His job would be grabbing and tackling guys. Normal people don't want to be touched by queers. Got it ?

I'm betting your nights are saturated with homo-erotic dreams.

Poor fella.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Easy answer. How you live your faith is mostly a private matter. How you run your business is mostly a public one, when you serve the public that is. You don't have to give up anything more than you have to to work for someone else. If the boss says stop preaching, it's stop and compromise or hit the road. We can only allow for so much faith when the goal is business.

If you work in my Agnostic Bookstore and I tell you to take the cross off, you can do it or you can vote with your feet. I'm not a church, I'm a business.

Interesting how you seem to equate "running a business" with "being a civil servant". Somewhere along the way, we've gone from making money selling goods and services to people to being obligated to provide goods and services to everyone.

By the way, I thought the whole point of owning your own business was freedom from working for someone else and having to do things their way. Seems like you would have business ownership be a bigger shackle than being an employee is.

What you think is incorrect. Try running a business and you'll find out there is work, in the good times, but not freedom. I do work for people I wouldn't piss on if they were on fire in other circumstances. It's just business.

Ahhh, yes. The old "If you don't agree with my perspective, you OBVIOUSLY just have no experience and know nothing about it" argument.

Consider this. Maybe not everyone runs a business the way you do, and maybe your attempt to pretend that by "freedom" I meant "not having to work your ass off" is as lame as you are.

You want to work for anyone and everyone? Fine. Do you have the right to force everyone else to run a business the way you personally think is good? No.

 

[Jarhead]

1. Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.

2. They demand to have jobs teaching kids (telling them homosexuality is normal), serve in the military (showering with heterosexuals), play football with heterosexuals (grabbing them, tackling them), engaging in queer sex (guys kissing each other ) in public, etc. They also change the English language (having ruined a wonderful English word > "gay" which I refuse to use to describe queers)

3. Who said I want to see their perversions ? I certainly don't.

The curriculum sets what is taught to all the kids.
"play football, tackling, grabbing them".
LOL, dude I played 14 seasons of football and there were gay guys then and now.

"Curriculum" my ass. I had queer teachers in college and they lauded the homosexual lifestyle every day.

You asked me how queers impose their perversions. There's a queer dude, right now, who wants to be an NFL defensive tackle. His job would be grabbing and tackling guys. Normal people don't want to be touched by queers. Got it ?

Normal people don't care who touches them as long as the touching is not sexual in nature...and in football, it is by no means sexual in nature. For example, the ball player you mentioned informed his teammates that he was gay yet none of them refused to practice or shower with him.

Homophobes, however, fear being touched by gays.

Thus why they are called homophobes.

 

[Iceweasel]

"Because of the press of other engagements I am booked solid and can not handle your engagement or requirements by your deadline"
works every time.

Being forced to lie works for you?

 

[dblack]

"Because of the press of other engagements I am booked solid and can not handle your engagement or requirements by your deadline"
works every time.

Being forced to lie works for you?

Under a regime the presumes to second-guess your personal preferences as a matter of law, lying is about the only recourse to freedom.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So a business owner in Arizona could put up a sign " WHITES ONLY" ? And claim it's a religious thing?

God, do you know how predictable and boring it is that every time you leftists get in trouble, you run to the blacks to hide behind them?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Interesting how you seem to equate "running a business" with "being a civil servant". Somewhere along the way, we've gone from making money selling goods and services to people to being obligated to provide goods and services to everyone.

By the way, I thought the whole point of owning your own business was freedom from working for someone else and having to do things their way. Seems like you would have business ownership be a bigger shackle than being an employee is.

What you think is incorrect. Try running a business and you'll find out there is work, in the good times, but not freedom. I do work for people I wouldn't piss on if they were on fire in other circumstances. It's just business.

Ahhh, yes. The old "If you don't agree with my perspective, you OBVIOUSLY just have no experience and know nothing about it" argument.

Consider this. Maybe not everyone runs a business the way you do, and maybe your attempt to pretend that by "freedom" I meant "not having to work your ass off" is as lame as you are.

You want to work for anyone and everyone? Fine. Do you have the right to force everyone else to run a business the way you personally think is good? No.

Pretty much everybody does run a business the way I do. It's bad business not to. And it's just business. If I only served Liberal Agnostics where I live my customer base would be one in a 100. Ain't happin' no matter what I believe about the nonsense they believe.

 

[Gadawg73]

1. Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.

2. They demand to have jobs teaching kids (telling them homosexuality is normal), serve in the military (showering with heterosexuals), play football with heterosexuals (grabbing them, tackling them), engaging in queer sex (guys kissing each other ) in public, etc. They also change the English language (having ruined a wonderful English word > "gay" which I refuse to use to describe queers)

3. Who said I want to see their perversions ? I certainly don't.

The curriculum sets what is taught to all the kids.
"play football, tackling, grabbing them".
LOL, dude I played 14 seasons of football and there were gay guys then and now.

"Curriculum" my ass. I had queer teachers in college and they lauded the homosexual lifestyle every day.

You asked me how queers impose their perversions. There's a queer dude, right now, who wants to be an NFL defensive tackle. His job would be grabbing and tackling guys. Normal people don't want to be touched by queers. Got it ?

Show me where it caused any problems he was playing for 4 years in college.
Ever heard of The Southeastern conference? They are the very BEST college football conference in the world. No question.
Michael Sam was the defensive Most Valuable Player last year in that conference. Toughest football conference in the world.
Try and get over your fear of gay folk. Those of us that actually crossed between the lines and played against the very best know better.
Stick to your dating service and good luck as you know nothing about football.
But again, show me where Sam caused ANY problems during his 4 years playing college football at the highest level.
You know you can't so admit it.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

So a business owner in Arizona could put up a sign " WHITES ONLY" ? And claim it's a religious thing?

God, do you know how predictable and boring it is that every time you leftists get in trouble, you run to the blacks to hide behind them?

His point is valid so why don't you just answer his question?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

"Because of the press of other engagements I am booked solid and can not handle your engagement or requirements by your deadline"
works every time.

Being forced to lie works for you?

See Jesus, I didn't bake the cake, and I'll I had to do was break a Commandment.

 

[Gadawg73]

"Because of the press of other engagements I am booked solid and can not handle your engagement or requirements by your deadline"
works every time.

Being forced to lie works for you?

No one forces me to do anything.
That is the honest answer.
The lie is they are doing it for religious reasons.
Christianity does not teach hate.
I WAS the force coming off the edge.

 

[Gadawg73]

"You eat hog sammiches and **** your wife's grandmother on the side so I will not sell you the $125,000.00 Bentley"
Yeah right, we need a law to allow them to do that as if that is an everyday thing.
The law is TARGETED at gay folk and business knows it.
Why are people anti business?

 

[kaz]

Of course you are welcome to your opinion, but the United States Supreme Court disagreed just like they disagreed with the Commonwealth of Virginia when they said in the Loving case in 1967 that there no violation of equal protection because coloreds and whites were treated differently

Being gay does not change who you can marry under the law. Being black did change who you could marry under the law. They got that one right.

Regardless of getting Loving right, the SCOTUS isn't deserving of any respect. They have also found in the Constitution:

1) Government can confiscate property from one citizen and give it to another for the benefit of the government and not public use (New London).

2) They can base their rulings on the laws of other countries.

3) Government can regulate political speech heading into elections (so called campaign finance reform).

4) Discrimination in favor of blacks is acceptable for 25 years (O'Conner)

5) Government can regulate intrastate trade

6) Obamacare and all it's regulations and mandates is just a tax.

7) The 9th and 10th amendments were completely eliminated under FDR.

Then there's the oldie and goodie that blacks are property that are to be returned to their owners.

Then there are things they made up completely, including separation of church and State, the right to an abortion and Miranda. And there are gyrations like "privacy." Privacy is iron clad protected by the 9th and 10th amendments. But they eliminated that, so they had to make up a new right to privacy, which then gives them a bunch of more powers.

And while technically I concede you're right they overturned the Federal portion, clearly now all of DOMA has to be overturned because if you accept their argument on Federal employees based on the 14th Amendment for the Federal government, in what possible way are the States not violating the 14th Amendment since the court said not recognizing gay marriage is a violation of the 14th, and the Constitution also says that the States are subject to the Consitution? They aren't of course, but now the Court has to either overturn their bad DOMA ruling or apply it to all of DOMA. Of course they will do the latter, just a matter of time.

The law says you can not marry someone you fall in love with of the same sex so your first sentence is false. Of course it does not change it under the law. That is the PROBLEM with the law.
Same as this proposed law.

And where you take what you feel is fairness is the legislature. The Constitution doesn't give the Supreme Court the power to make life fair, and it doesn't let you off the hook to take your view of fairness to elected officials instead of self appointed dictators.

I oppose all government marriage. Gay marriage in the meantime specifically doesn't really matter to me. I don't see why anyone needs a piece of paper from a bureaucrat to validate their relationship. The Supreme Court legislating does matter to me.

 

[Gadawg73]

The bill is dead. If Brewer was to sign it she would have already announced it.
She will veto it.
Republicans are pro business.

 

[Jarhead]

What you think is incorrect. Try running a business and you'll find out there is work, in the good times, but not freedom. I do work for people I wouldn't piss on if they were on fire in other circumstances. It's just business.

Ahhh, yes. The old "If you don't agree with my perspective, you OBVIOUSLY just have no experience and know nothing about it" argument.

Consider this. Maybe not everyone runs a business the way you do, and maybe your attempt to pretend that by "freedom" I meant "not having to work your ass off" is as lame as you are.

You want to work for anyone and everyone? Fine. Do you have the right to force everyone else to run a business the way you personally think is good? No.

Pretty much everybody does run a business the way I do. It's bad business not to. And it's just business. If I only served Liberal Agnostics where I live my customer base would be one in a 100. Ain't happin' no matter what I believe about the nonsense they believe.

actually, you are dead wrong with that premise.

Now, before I go on, I am against the bill in Arizona for it will open the door to some very ugly situations.

However.....

When a business has a target audience....be it "blacks" (there are retailers who carry African art; certain ethinic styles of clothes, etc.)....or "Christians", (there are stores that sell religious items strictly for the Christian faith)....or "Jews", (there are stores that sell only kosher items)....they tend to do very well for they do not buy and display "non sellable items" and they tend to get the entire community of those in that group;.

Targeting one group has been a proven business model for centuries.

 

[Gadawg73]

Being gay does not change who you can marry under the law. Being black did change who you could marry under the law. They got that one right.

Regardless of getting Loving right, the SCOTUS isn't deserving of any respect. They have also found in the Constitution:

1) Government can confiscate property from one citizen and give it to another for the benefit of the government and not public use (New London).

2) They can base their rulings on the laws of other countries.

3) Government can regulate political speech heading into elections (so called campaign finance reform).

4) Discrimination in favor of blacks is acceptable for 25 years (O'Conner)

5) Government can regulate intrastate trade

6) Obamacare and all it's regulations and mandates is just a tax.

7) The 9th and 10th amendments were completely eliminated under FDR.

Then there's the oldie and goodie that blacks are property that are to be returned to their owners.

Then there are things they made up completely, including separation of church and State, the right to an abortion and Miranda. And there are gyrations like "privacy." Privacy is iron clad protected by the 9th and 10th amendments. But they eliminated that, so they had to make up a new right to privacy, which then gives them a bunch of more powers.

And while technically I concede you're right they overturned the Federal portion, clearly now all of DOMA has to be overturned because if you accept their argument on Federal employees based on the 14th Amendment for the Federal government, in what possible way are the States not violating the 14th Amendment since the court said not recognizing gay marriage is a violation of the 14th, and the Constitution also says that the States are subject to the Consitution? They aren't of course, but now the Court has to either overturn their bad DOMA ruling or apply it to all of DOMA. Of course they will do the latter, just a matter of time.

The law says you can not marry someone you fall in love with of the same sex so your first sentence is false. Of course it does not change it under the law. That is the PROBLEM with the law.
Same as this proposed law.

And where you take what you feel is fairness is the legislature. The Constitution doesn't give the Supreme Court the power to make life fair, and it doesn't let you off the hook to take your view of fairness to elected officials instead of self appointed dictators.

I personally don't care either way about gay government marriage. I oppose all government marriage. Gay marriage specifically doesn't really matter to me. The Supreme Court legislating does matter to me.

I could care less what is fair or not. Fair has nothing to do with but I do agree it is a state's issue but the Supreme Court has ruled how many times against states denying equal access under the law striking down anti gay marriage statutes?

 

[hangover]

The NFL is going to move the Super Bowl out of Arizona if the governor signs the discrimination bill. I triple dog dare her to sign it. Even the republicans that made the bill now realize that if it becomes law, the GOP will lose their asses this year in the elections, so they want her to veto it. Wow! Signs of grey matter activity in the GOP! You can knock me over with a feather with that one.

 

[Jarhead]

So a business owner in Arizona could put up a sign " WHITES ONLY" ? And claim it's a religious thing?

God, do you know how predictable and boring it is that every time you leftists get in trouble, you run to the blacks to hide behind them?

His point is valid so why don't you just answer his question?

I will.

There is no religion that forbids commerce between blacks and whites.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Ahhh, yes. The old "If you don't agree with my perspective, you OBVIOUSLY just have no experience and know nothing about it" argument.

Consider this. Maybe not everyone runs a business the way you do, and maybe your attempt to pretend that by "freedom" I meant "not having to work your ass off" is as lame as you are.

You want to work for anyone and everyone? Fine. Do you have the right to force everyone else to run a business the way you personally think is good? No.

Pretty much everybody does run a business the way I do. It's bad business not to. And it's just business. If I only served Liberal Agnostics where I live my customer base would be one in a 100. Ain't happin' no matter what I believe about the nonsense they believe.

actually, you are dead wrong with that premise.

Now, before I go on, I am against the bill in Arizona for it will open the door to some very ugly situations.

However.....

When a business has a target audience....be it "blacks" (there are retailers who carry African art; certain ethinic styles of clothes, etc.)....or "Christians", (there are stores that sell religious items strictly for the Christian faith)....or "Jews", (there are stores that sell only kosher items)....they tend to do very well for they do not buy and display "non sellable items" and they tend to get the entire community of those in that group;.

Targeting one group has been a proven business model for centuries.

A store that doesn't sell everything is smart, but you have to have the customer base. I'm not a store and to only serve clients like myself means I wouldn't have any. That's bad business. Even in your example, if you walk in with cash the correct phrase is How can we help you today not Get out fagboy.