Bill Allowing Businesses to Refuse Gays Service

[Iceweasel]

I'm just saying, when this law passes, what happens if you're like this one gay kid in a small town and you're no longer allowed in any of the bars, no longer allowed to buy groceries, etc, etc. I mean, is that like a WIN for the town and society in general?

I don't get why this law is ABSOLUTELY necessary.

The law apparently became necessary because private businesses were being threatened or sued for not accomodating the relationship, in the form of a gay wedding cake, for example. If a gay was in a hostile small town I don't think the law would help (assuming it was that widespread in scope). He might get his beer but there's a lot of other ways someone can be made to feel not at home. There MAY be some small towns like that but I don't see it as a national problem. I think that gay should move instead of forcing by way of government that everyone to accept him. I's imagine it would make that small town even more hostile.

 

[KevinWestern]

I'm just saying, when this law passes, what happens if you're like this one gay kid in a small town and you're no longer allowed in any of the bars, no longer allowed to buy groceries, etc, etc. I mean, is that like a WIN for the town and society in general?

I don't get why this law is ABSOLUTELY necessary.

The law apparently became necessary because private businesses were being threatened or sued for not accomodating the relationship, in the form of a gay wedding cake, for example. If a gay was in a hostile small town I don't think the law would help (assuming it was that widespread in scope). He might get his beer but there's a lot of other ways someone can be made to feel not at home. There MAY be some small towns like that but I don't see it as a national problem. I think that gay should move instead of forcing by way of government that everyone to accept him. I's imagine it would make that small town even more hostile.

I get there's maybe a cake argument, but for photographers (and many other services) business is done on a selective basis anyways. Many photographers interview their customers beforehand, and will only do weddings with people they like.

Are we passing this ENTIRE law just to protect cake makers from making gay cakes? Maybe it'll cover a handful of other wedding-related services?

I'm interested in this dialog; what are the other scenarios where doing business with a gay would 'threaten religious freedom', and the business owner can't already back out of the deal (like a photographer)?

 

[Iceweasel]

Are we passing this ENTIRE law just to protect cake makers from making gay cakes? Maybe it'll cover a handful of other wedding-related services?

I'm interested in this dialog; what are the other scenarios where doing business with a gay would 'threaten religious freedom', and the business owner can't already back out of the deal (like a photographer)?

I don't know the scope of the law but it isn't such a small matter. Anyone that does anything in the graphic or print world, sign making, invitations, etc. And any profession that could be asked to produce a gay theme of sorts.

I mentioned earlier, long before this state even had gay marriage, Canadian gays ganged up on a Seattle wedding invitation provider. A small business owned by a Christian lady that refused to offer them gay announcements.

Seattle had some "anti-discrimination" law that included sexual orientation. I heard the gays call in to a local talk show bragging about how they were piling on and causing her fine after fine after fine. That amy be OK with you but from I'm sitting that's sick, twisted and evil.

They could have gone to any number of other places but their intend is to intimidate, blackmail and force you out of business if you dare to not hold their RELATIONSHIPS in the same regard as the traditional men and women.

 

[KevinWestern]

Are we passing this ENTIRE law just to protect cake makers from making gay cakes? Maybe it'll cover a handful of other wedding-related services?

I'm interested in this dialog; what are the other scenarios where doing business with a gay would 'threaten religious freedom', and the business owner can't already back out of the deal (like a photographer)?

I don't know the scope of the law but it isn't such a small matter. Anyone that does anything in the graphic or print world, sign making, invitations, etc. And any profession that could be asked to produce a gay theme of sorts.

I mentioned earlier, long before this state even had gay marriage, Canadian gays ganged up on a Seattle wedding invitation provider. A small business owned by a Christian lady that refused to offer them gay announcements.

Seattle had some "anti-discrimination" law that included sexual orientation. I heard the gays call in to a local talk show bragging about how they were piling on and causing her fine after fine after fine. That amy be OK with you but from I'm sitting that's sick, twisted and evil.

They could have gone to any number of other places but their intend is to intimidate, blackmail and force you out of business if you dare to not hold their RELATIONSHIPS in the same regard as the traditional men and women.

But every argument I've heard is in the wedding context whereas I think this law is going to be abused by non-wedding related businesses (like a bar, serving a man walking in). You know? Is there away we can also prevent that from occurring?

 

[OKTexas]

Did it open a can of worms when businesses could no longer have a "whites only" section? I don't think so.

I don't think this is a can of worms here...

So you're cool with someone being put in jail for refusing to service a gay wedding? Think carefully before you say yes, because you're also saying yes to jailing blacks that refuse to service a KKK event, of a Jew who refuses to service a Nazi event, should I go on?

Jail? No, of course not.

But do you understand my slippery slope concern? How can we protect a person like a cake builder who doesn’t want to directly participate in a gay wedding while at the same time not open the doors to entire towns not serving gay people?

I don't understand how serving a gay guy a beer is "violating religious freedom", but I feel like this law is going to be abused to accommodate such a scenario.

Anytime you use the force of law there is always a chance of being jailed and who would have thought the faghadist would be going after people with such zeal who don't agree with them. Gays have always had the same protections as everyone else, but that's not good enough, now they want special treatment for their sexual proclivities, they want to me more equal than other men or women.

 

[KevinWestern]

So you're cool with someone being put in jail for refusing to service a gay wedding? Think carefully before you say yes, because you're also saying yes to jailing blacks that refuse to service a KKK event, of a Jew who refuses to service a Nazi event, should I go on?

Jail? No, of course not.

But do you understand my slippery slope concern? How can we protect a person like a cake builder who doesn’t want to directly participate in a gay wedding while at the same time not open the doors to entire towns not serving gay people?

I don't understand how serving a gay guy a beer is "violating religious freedom", but I feel like this law is going to be abused to accommodate such a scenario.

Anytime you use the force of law there is always a chance of being jailed and who would have thought the faghadist would be going after people with such zeal who don't agree with them. Gays have always had the same protections as everyone else, but that's not good enough, now they want special treatment for their sexual proclivities, they want to me more equal than other men or women.

In the context of this conversation, we're talking exclusively about gays not being treated equally. The cake person WILL make a cake for the straight couple, but WON'T make it for the gays. The bar WILL serve to a straight person, but WON'T serve the gays.

In the context of this conversation, it truly is a discussion about equal treatment and lack thereof...

 

[Iceweasel]

In the context of this conversation, we're talking exclusively about gays not being treated equally. The cake person WILL make a cake for the straight couple, but WON'T make it for the gays. The bar WILL serve to a straight person, but WON'T serve the gays.

In the context of this conversation, it truly is a discussion about equal treatment and lack thereof...

There's a differnce between serving a homosexual and being forced to produce a homosexual themed product. Why is that so goddamned hard to understand?

 

[bendog]

In the context of this conversation, we're talking exclusively about gays not being treated equally. The cake person WILL make a cake for the straight couple, but WON'T make it for the gays. The bar WILL serve to a straight person, but WON'T serve the gays.

In the context of this conversation, it truly is a discussion about equal treatment and lack thereof...

There's a differnce between serving a homosexual and being forced to produce a homosexual themed product. Why is that so goddamned hard to understand?

Well, just so long at they can't get a cup of coffee in the donut shop I hit in the a.m.! I mean, the temerity of these people and their ilk. (-:

 

[OKTexas]

Jail? No, of course not.

But do you understand my slippery slope concern? How can we protect a person like a cake builder who doesn’t want to directly participate in a gay wedding while at the same time not open the doors to entire towns not serving gay people?

I don't understand how serving a gay guy a beer is "violating religious freedom", but I feel like this law is going to be abused to accommodate such a scenario.

Anytime you use the force of law there is always a chance of being jailed and who would have thought the faghadist would be going after people with such zeal who don't agree with them. Gays have always had the same protections as everyone else, but that's not good enough, now they want special treatment for their sexual proclivities, they want to me more equal than other men or women.

In the context of this conversation, we're talking exclusively about gays not being treated equally. The cake person WILL make a cake for the straight couple, but WON'T make it for the gays. The bar WILL serve to a straight person, but WON'T serve the gays.

In the context of this conversation, it truly is a discussion about equal treatment and lack thereof...

That's what you keep pretending, gays have always had equal rights, when do the shop owners get equal rights? Gays can choose who they do business with, evidently the shop owner doesn't have the the same rights. How about we treat the shop owners equally.

 

[bendog]

Well, actually, a gay biz owner couldn't refuse to serve straights. Granted this would only happen on Portlandia, but nevertheless .....

 

[KevinWestern]

In the context of this conversation, we're talking exclusively about gays not being treated equally. The cake person WILL make a cake for the straight couple, but WON'T make it for the gays. The bar WILL serve to a straight person, but WON'T serve the gays.

In the context of this conversation, it truly is a discussion about equal treatment and lack thereof...

There's a differnce between serving a homosexual and being forced to produce a homosexual themed product. Why is that so goddamned hard to understand?

I understand, but my point was that gays want to be treated equally by businesses owners. Right? That's a fair statement.

If a cake maker says no to the gay couple and yes to the straight couple, that is unequal treatment, right?

 

[Moonglow]

gays have always had equal rights

See anything wrong with this statement?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

In the context of this conversation, we're talking exclusively about gays not being treated equally. The cake person WILL make a cake for the straight couple, but WON'T make it for the gays. The bar WILL serve to a straight person, but WON'T serve the gays.

In the context of this conversation, it truly is a discussion about equal treatment and lack thereof...

There's a differnce between serving a homosexual and being forced to produce a homosexual themed product. Why is that so goddamned hard to understand?

What exactly does a "gay" wedding cake look like? And if you say it's a rainbow, well that's done all the time for little girls but I doubt they refuse to make that just it case it's for a 5-year-old Radical Nazi Agenda-pushing Lesbian eh?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

gays have always had equal rights

See anything wrong with this statement?

They have? My bad, I thought we used to burn them, like Christians.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Let's go back to the Good Old Days.

 

[Iceweasel]

I understand, but my point was that gays want to be treated equally by businesses owners. Right? That's a fair statement.

If a cake maker says no to the gay couple and yes to the straight couple, that is unequal treatment, right?

And a Nazi couple may decide that a Jewish baker make them a Swastika cake. That would be equal too then. There is no right to a wedding cake of your choosing. You find someone willing to make it.

 

[KevinWestern]

I understand, but my point was that gays want to be treated equally by businesses owners. Right? That's a fair statement.

If a cake maker says no to the gay couple and yes to the straight couple, that is unequal treatment, right?

And a Nazi couple may decide that a Jewish baker make them a Swastika cake. That would be equal too then. There is no right to a wedding cake of your choosing. You find someone willing to make it.

Hey I already said that I understand that perspective, however (I've asked this before) do you think this law is going to be abused in the sense gays will be refused restaurant service, bar service, etc in a manner that really has nothing to do with religious freedom anymore?

Are you concerned about that?

 

[bendog]

I understand, but my point was that gays want to be treated equally by businesses owners. Right? That's a fair statement.

If a cake maker says no to the gay couple and yes to the straight couple, that is unequal treatment, right?

And a Nazi couple may decide that a Jewish baker make them a Swastika cake. That would be equal too then. There is no right to a wedding cake of your choosing. You find someone willing to make it.

For what it's worth, I agree with you on what the law should be. I'm not sure courts will agree. But, personally, if I knew any baker who refused a gay couple a cake, I'd never buy anything from him, and I'd be willing to walk a picket line in front of his store.

 

[nodoginnafight]

I think if the business would just provide a confessional at the front door - then all could be cleansed BEFORE any transactions and everything would be fine.

 

[nodoginnafight]

If you are going to claim religious reasons prevent you from serving gays, then the courts should be able to reference your religious texts and make sure you do not serve ANY person who has participated in ANY prohibited activity.

If you served ONE person who has broken a single one of your religious tenets, then your "religious principles" defense is gone.

As a Christian, I detest those who have bastardized my faith to serve political purposes. There is NOTHING in the teachings of Jesus to defend actions like these. So yes, they should be discredited.