Gay statists strike again...you will submit!!!!

[Seawytch]

So...Mormons have the free exercise of polygamy? So...religions have the free exercise of human sacrifice?

Well, we know for a fact that Native American's can't "freely exercise" their religious beliefs by ingesting peyote.

Employment Division v. Smith | LII / Legal Information Institute

 

[2aguy]

And, no, those bakers and photographers can only have businesses because we have the government infrastructure to support them. Otherwise, they'd get robbed every day.

Ahhhh...this is simply Horse****. The government only has the money to pay for the infrastucture because of the businesses...watch the lefty controlled cities as businesses leave because of higher taxes...the revenue dries up and they can't pay for your so called government roads, police, education...check out Detroit and the other lefty paradises...

It is a chicken and egg argument and the lefties...of course...get it wrong...

 

[martybegan]

Again, its not about equality, its about forcing acceptance. The photographers and the bakers were the start, this is the next logical step.

Yes, when you are offering a PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION, you have to offer it to everyone who can pay. Period.

"We don't serve you people" has been against the law since the 1960's.

This isn't a store. There is a difference between being made to sell a bagel from behind a counter to all comers, and having the government force you to host an event you find morally objectionable.

The only reason you people do this is you like forcing your own morality on others. it makes you no better than religious people trying to force theirs on you. In fact its worse because you assholes use the government to do it.

It isn't a store, but it IS a public accommodation. They were offering it as available for weddings and taking money to utilize it. They advertised it to all comers and no doubt were interested when originally approached until they found out they'd be playing Melissa Ethridge Albums at the wedding.

It's not a matter of "forcing morality", it's a matter of preventing discrimination. This isn't even a new thing, we had this argument about race 50 years ago and the bigots lost.

In the argument 50 years ago it was the government forcing discrimination via laws. Actually we have the same thing here, execpt the discrimination is against the owners, and agains people YOU don't like, so that makes it OK in your book.

Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States | LII / Legal Information Institute

Marty,

The above link is to Heartland of Atlanta Motel v United States which is the SCOTUS ruling on Public Accommodation laws.

Please show us where any part of the case was based on a Georgia law requiring that motels not serve black people.

Thank you in advance.


>>>>

A hotel is what a public accommodation actually is, like a store you walk into. Hotels also deal with travel, which is often part of interstate commerce, which gives the feds some entry into the issue of how they are run. My question is how a vital service like lodging somehow relates to a contracted service like doing something for a wedding, which is non vital, and in fact has easily available alternatives.

 

[Seawytch]

Marty, have you called your congressman for the repeal of Public Accommodation laws yet? They are the ones that have to do it...

 

[martybegan]

Marty, have you called your congressman for the repeal of Public Accommodation laws yet? They are the ones that have to do it...

No, because I know my congressman would never vote for it. And i do vote for is opponent every time, but i live in NYC so you know how that goes.

I've petitioned my local state senator about the SAFE act, and got a boilerplate (we know better than you blah blah blah) response.

I have to get a congressperson who would listen to me elected first.

 

[Katzndogz]

So...Mormons have the free exercise of polygamy? So...religions have the free exercise of human sacrifice?

Well, we know for a fact that Native American's can't "freely exercise" their religious beliefs by ingesting peyote.

Employment Division v. Smith | LII / Legal Information Institute

Of course they can! That's why Bill Clinton signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act into law.
Peyote Law
No one ever thought that this law would benefit Hobby Lobby.

 

[Redfish]

Marty, have you called your congressman for the repeal of Public Accommodation laws yet? They are the ones that have to do it...

Unconstitutional application of any law is illegal. This is about FREEDOM. I have no desire to buy a drink at a gay bar and they have no obligation to sell me one.

 

[2aguy]

First, Jim Crow laws predated bus service.

Hmmm...it didn't predate coaches and trains did it?

I am looking for the history paper that points out that segregation in transportation wasn't universal in the south until democrats passed Jim Crow laws...

 

[bodecea]

Okay, so let's nail it down, is it okay for a business to day, "We don't Serve N****rs!" if they are saying it without prompting from the government? Or to refuse to rent an apartment on the same logic?

Are you saying that racism is okay when practiced by private individuals, or only homophobia?

Now, the argument made by the couple was that this was their "religious beliefs", but I'm guessing they didn't check to see if every bride was still a virgin like the bible says they should be.

I'll say it...if you own private property...that is a business, which is actually private,property...you should be,able,to run that business,however you want, serving or not serving anyone you want....

the thing is....the government cannot mandate discrimination...that is where the problem came in in the past...the free market will overcome discrimination in private businesses..

For example...the bakers and caterers and photographers who refused to help in gay weddings...there were others who gladly served those customers...right? That is how the free market works...

Now in the days when the democrats were discriminating against blacks...they used the power of government to force all businesses to do it...so there wasn't a way around it in the free market because the free market was controlled by the government...

Okay, so let's nail it down, is it okay for a business to day, "We don't Serve N****rs!" if they are saying it without prompting from the government? Or to refuse to rent an apartment on the same logic?

Are you saying that racism is okay when practiced by private individuals, or only homophobia?

Now, the argument made by the couple was that this was their "religious beliefs", but I'm guessing they didn't check to see if every bride was still a virgin like the bible says they should be.

I'll say it...if you own private property...that is a business, which is actually private,property...you should be,able,to run that business,however you want, serving or not serving anyone you want....

the thing is....the government cannot mandate discrimination...that is where the problem came in in the past...the free market will overcome discrimination in private businesses..

For example...the bakers and caterers and photographers who refused to help in gay weddings...there were others who gladly served those customers...right? That is how the free market works...

Now in the days when the democrats were discriminating against blacks...they used the power of government to force all businesses to do it...so there wasn't a way around it in the free market because the free market was controlled by the government...

Marty, have you called your congressman for the repeal of Public Accommodation laws yet? They are the ones that have to do it...

No, because I know my congressman would never vote for it. And i do vote for is opponent every time, but i live in NYC so you know how that goes.

I've petitioned my local state senator about the SAFE act, and got a boilerplate (we know better than you blah blah blah) response.

I have to get a congressperson who would listen to me elected first.

Well, it seems to me that you are in the minority in your state when it comes to a DESIRE to eliminate Public Accommodation Laws. That's the down side to a democracy, eh?

 

[Redfish]

First, Jim Crow laws predated bus service.

Hmmm...it didn't predate coaches and trains did it?

I am looking for the history paper that points out that segregation in transportation wasn't universal in the south until democrats passed Jim Crow laws...

Race and sexual orientation are not analogous. Until you libs stop that false comparison, you will get nowhere with this.

 

[Redfish]

Okay, so let's nail it down, is it okay for a business to day, "We don't Serve N****rs!" if they are saying it without prompting from the government? Or to refuse to rent an apartment on the same logic?

Are you saying that racism is okay when practiced by private individuals, or only homophobia?

Now, the argument made by the couple was that this was their "religious beliefs", but I'm guessing they didn't check to see if every bride was still a virgin like the bible says they should be.

I'll say it...if you own private property...that is a business, which is actually private,property...you should be,able,to run that business,however you want, serving or not serving anyone you want....

the thing is....the government cannot mandate discrimination...that is where the problem came in in the past...the free market will overcome discrimination in private businesses..

For example...the bakers and caterers and photographers who refused to help in gay weddings...there were others who gladly served those customers...right? That is how the free market works...

Now in the days when the democrats were discriminating against blacks...they used the power of government to force all businesses to do it...so there wasn't a way around it in the free market because the free market was controlled by the government...

Okay, so let's nail it down, is it okay for a business to day, "We don't Serve N****rs!" if they are saying it without prompting from the government? Or to refuse to rent an apartment on the same logic?

Are you saying that racism is okay when practiced by private individuals, or only homophobia?

Now, the argument made by the couple was that this was their "religious beliefs", but I'm guessing they didn't check to see if every bride was still a virgin like the bible says they should be.

I'll say it...if you own private property...that is a business, which is actually private,property...you should be,able,to run that business,however you want, serving or not serving anyone you want....

the thing is....the government cannot mandate discrimination...that is where the problem came in in the past...the free market will overcome discrimination in private businesses..

For example...the bakers and caterers and photographers who refused to help in gay weddings...there were others who gladly served those customers...right? That is how the free market works...

Now in the days when the democrats were discriminating against blacks...they used the power of government to force all businesses to do it...so there wasn't a way around it in the free market because the free market was controlled by the government...

Marty, have you called your congressman for the repeal of Public Accommodation laws yet? They are the ones that have to do it...

No, because I know my congressman would never vote for it. And i do vote for is opponent every time, but i live in NYC so you know how that goes.

I've petitioned my local state senator about the SAFE act, and got a boilerplate (we know better than you blah blah blah) response.

I have to get a congressperson who would listen to me elected first.

Well, it seems to me that you are in the minority in your state when it comes to a DESIRE to eliminate Public Accommodation Laws. That's the down side to a democracy, eh?

PA laws do not require me to contract for a service with anyone. A contract for any service must be a bilateral agreement.

 

[Katzndogz]

There are public accommodation laws and then there is the misuse and misapplication of public accommodation laws. The lesbian couple rented a barn for their reception. This wasn't a problem. The business had rented that barn to gay couples many times. No one ever rescinded the agreement to rent the barn. After those negotiations were concluded to the satisfaction of the lesbian couple they said that they wanted to have the wedding itself in the business person's living room. That is not part of the premises offered to the public. It may have been occasionally used for a wedding but was not part of the premises open to the public.

 

[2aguy]

Here is one source...

C. Vann Woodward's The Strange Career of Jim Crow :: Strange Career of Jim Crow Essays

Not only were blacks experiencing political freedom but socially they were in many cases described as enjoying more independence than their counterparts in the North. “Excessive squeamishness or fussiness about contact with Negroes was commonly identified as a lower-class white attitude.” Thus a certain degree of toleration amongst whites for the intermingling of races in many forms of the public sphere was experienced. This was clearly displayed by the general acceptance of the intermixing of races in residential neighborhoods and on many forms of public transportation. Woodward principally asserts that the presence of these discontinuities in and amongst themselves prove his thesis. That although this time was far from a golden age of race relations as there was undeniable exploitation of blacks throughout the South, this time period was clearly characterized by fundamental discontinuities that simply could not have existed if Jim Crow had been firmly in place after the war.

 

[2aguy]

Race, Place, and the Law, 1836-1948 - David Delaney - Google Books

see page 101, second paragraph....

Here is a look at Walter Williams work on discrimination vs. free market solutions...unions and South Africa are mentioned...

Man vs. the State - Reason.com

W

illiams' 1989 book South Africa's War Against Capitalism brought the same type of scrutiny to the infamous apartheid regime. According to many leftists at that time, apartheid epitomized the exploitation inherent in a capitalist system. But as Williams pointed out, the South African government maintained white power by denying blacks economic liberty as well as political rights. "The whole ugly history of apartheid has been an attack on free markets and the rights of individuals," he wrote. One distinguishing feature of the apartheid state, for example, was a set of laws that "reserved" certain jobs exclusively for whites. Not exactly laissez faire. "The presence of job reservation laws suggests that at least some employers would hire blacks," Williams argued, since otherwise the laws would be unnecessary. To maintain the white power system, the government had to actively suppress market forces.

Read more: Man vs. the State - Reason.com

 

[WorldWatcher]

PA laws do not require me to contract for a service with anyone. A contract for any service must be a bilateral agreement.

Depends on the reason you refuse to provide your normal services.

If it's because you are already booked, will be on vacation, don't provide that service, or a variety of other reasons - you are correct PA laws have no bearing.

On the other hand if you routinely offer goods or services as part of your business model and refuse service based on one of the characteristics defined in the specific PA law - then your act is illegal.

Refuse the service because the person is black - you violate the law (state and federal).

Refuse the service because the person is Jewish - you violate the law (state and federal).

Refuse the service to Mexican's - you violate the law (state and federal).

Refuse the service because the customer is homosexual - you violate the law (in New York, there is no federal law).​

PA laws don't allow for the denial of a contract based upon the characteristics defined in the law.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

There are public accommodation laws and then there is the misuse and misapplication of public accommodation laws. The lesbian couple rented a barn for their reception. This wasn't a problem. The business had rented that barn to gay couples many times. No one ever rescinded the agreement to rent the barn. After those negotiations were concluded to the satisfaction of the lesbian couple they said that they wanted to have the wedding itself in the business person's living room. That is not part of the premises offered to the public. It may have been occasionally used for a wedding but was not part of the premises open to the public.

You should really try to review the facts of a case before commenting and getting it wrong.

"The lesbian couple rented a barn for their reception, and that wasn't a problem." False, see the statement of facts in the case. They never got to the point of renting the barn for the reception because as soon as "she" was mentioned (in reference to the spouse) the owners denied service.

"After those negotiations were concluded to the satisfaction of the lesbian couple they said that they wanted to have the wedding itself in the business person's living room" False, see the statement of facts in the case. They never got to the point of renting the barn for the reception because as soon as "she" was mentioned (in reference to the spouse) the owners denied service.

"After those negotiations were concluded to the satisfaction of the lesbian couple they said that they wanted to have the wedding itself in the business person's living room" False, the owners refused to allow the wedding anywhere on the property. See facts of the case, PDF Page 15, "74. Cynthia Gifford has an objection to having a same-sex wedding ceremony held on the farm (Tr 157)."

"That is not part of the premises offered to the public. It may have been occasionally used for a wedding but was not part of the premises open to the public." There is no indication in the statement of facts that the issue was about holding the ceremony in anyone living room. The Giffords would not provide the same services the publicly offered (i.e. wedding ceremonies) anywhere on the farm.

www.capitalnewyork.com/sites/default/files/140808_DHR_LRF_Ruling.pdf


>>>>​

 

[martybegan]

Okay, so let's nail it down, is it okay for a business to day, "We don't Serve N****rs!" if they are saying it without prompting from the government? Or to refuse to rent an apartment on the same logic?

Are you saying that racism is okay when practiced by private individuals, or only homophobia?

Now, the argument made by the couple was that this was their "religious beliefs", but I'm guessing they didn't check to see if every bride was still a virgin like the bible says they should be.

I'll say it...if you own private property...that is a business, which is actually private,property...you should be,able,to run that business,however you want, serving or not serving anyone you want....

the thing is....the government cannot mandate discrimination...that is where the problem came in in the past...the free market will overcome discrimination in private businesses..

For example...the bakers and caterers and photographers who refused to help in gay weddings...there were others who gladly served those customers...right? That is how the free market works...

Now in the days when the democrats were discriminating against blacks...they used the power of government to force all businesses to do it...so there wasn't a way around it in the free market because the free market was controlled by the government...

Okay, so let's nail it down, is it okay for a business to day, "We don't Serve N****rs!" if they are saying it without prompting from the government? Or to refuse to rent an apartment on the same logic?

Are you saying that racism is okay when practiced by private individuals, or only homophobia?

Now, the argument made by the couple was that this was their "religious beliefs", but I'm guessing they didn't check to see if every bride was still a virgin like the bible says they should be.

I'll say it...if you own private property...that is a business, which is actually private,property...you should be,able,to run that business,however you want, serving or not serving anyone you want....

the thing is....the government cannot mandate discrimination...that is where the problem came in in the past...the free market will overcome discrimination in private businesses..

For example...the bakers and caterers and photographers who refused to help in gay weddings...there were others who gladly served those customers...right? That is how the free market works...

Now in the days when the democrats were discriminating against blacks...they used the power of government to force all businesses to do it...so there wasn't a way around it in the free market because the free market was controlled by the government...

Marty, have you called your congressman for the repeal of Public Accommodation laws yet? They are the ones that have to do it...

No, because I know my congressman would never vote for it. And i do vote for is opponent every time, but i live in NYC so you know how that goes.

I've petitioned my local state senator about the SAFE act, and got a boilerplate (we know better than you blah blah blah) response.

I have to get a congressperson who would listen to me elected first.

Well, it seems to me that you are in the minority in your state when it comes to a DESIRE to eliminate Public Accommodation Laws. That's the down side to a democracy, eh?

a persons rights are protected from democracy (51% democracy) by the constitution. Or at least they should be, unless you clowns get involved.

 

[bodecea]

First, Jim Crow laws predated bus service.

Hmmm...it didn't predate coaches and trains did it?

I am looking for the history paper that points out that segregation in transportation wasn't universal in the south until democrats passed Jim Crow laws...

Race and sexual orientation are not analogous. Until you libs stop that false comparison, you will get nowhere with this.

Civil rights are civil rights....are you sure you are a citizen of this country?

 

[bodecea]

Okay, so let's nail it down, is it okay for a business to day, "We don't Serve N****rs!" if they are saying it without prompting from the government? Or to refuse to rent an apartment on the same logic?

Are you saying that racism is okay when practiced by private individuals, or only homophobia?

Now, the argument made by the couple was that this was their "religious beliefs", but I'm guessing they didn't check to see if every bride was still a virgin like the bible says they should be.

I'll say it...if you own private property...that is a business, which is actually private,property...you should be,able,to run that business,however you want, serving or not serving anyone you want....

the thing is....the government cannot mandate discrimination...that is where the problem came in in the past...the free market will overcome discrimination in private businesses..

For example...the bakers and caterers and photographers who refused to help in gay weddings...there were others who gladly served those customers...right? That is how the free market works...

Now in the days when the democrats were discriminating against blacks...they used the power of government to force all businesses to do it...so there wasn't a way around it in the free market because the free market was controlled by the government...

Okay, so let's nail it down, is it okay for a business to day, "We don't Serve N****rs!" if they are saying it without prompting from the government? Or to refuse to rent an apartment on the same logic?

Are you saying that racism is okay when practiced by private individuals, or only homophobia?

Now, the argument made by the couple was that this was their "religious beliefs", but I'm guessing they didn't check to see if every bride was still a virgin like the bible says they should be.

I'll say it...if you own private property...that is a business, which is actually private,property...you should be,able,to run that business,however you want, serving or not serving anyone you want....

the thing is....the government cannot mandate discrimination...that is where the problem came in in the past...the free market will overcome discrimination in private businesses..

For example...the bakers and caterers and photographers who refused to help in gay weddings...there were others who gladly served those customers...right? That is how the free market works...

Now in the days when the democrats were discriminating against blacks...they used the power of government to force all businesses to do it...so there wasn't a way around it in the free market because the free market was controlled by the government...

Marty, have you called your congressman for the repeal of Public Accommodation laws yet? They are the ones that have to do it...

No, because I know my congressman would never vote for it. And i do vote for is opponent every time, but i live in NYC so you know how that goes.

I've petitioned my local state senator about the SAFE act, and got a boilerplate (we know better than you blah blah blah) response.

I have to get a congressperson who would listen to me elected first.

Well, it seems to me that you are in the minority in your state when it comes to a DESIRE to eliminate Public Accommodation Laws. That's the down side to a democracy, eh?

a persons rights are protected from democracy (51% democracy) by the constitution. Or at least they should be, unless you clowns get involved.

So...a minority doesn't have to follow a law passed by the majority? ( With the caveat that the law is constitutional....if one feels the law is NOT constitutional, any ONE person can file a brief to have the constitutionality of the law reviewed.....if need be all the way to the Supreme Court)

 

[martybegan]

Okay, so let's nail it down, is it okay for a business to day, "We don't Serve N****rs!" if they are saying it without prompting from the government? Or to refuse to rent an apartment on the same logic?

Are you saying that racism is okay when practiced by private individuals, or only homophobia?

Now, the argument made by the couple was that this was their "religious beliefs", but I'm guessing they didn't check to see if every bride was still a virgin like the bible says they should be.

I'll say it...if you own private property...that is a business, which is actually private,property...you should be,able,to run that business,however you want, serving or not serving anyone you want....

the thing is....the government cannot mandate discrimination...that is where the problem came in in the past...the free market will overcome discrimination in private businesses..

For example...the bakers and caterers and photographers who refused to help in gay weddings...there were others who gladly served those customers...right? That is how the free market works...

Now in the days when the democrats were discriminating against blacks...they used the power of government to force all businesses to do it...so there wasn't a way around it in the free market because the free market was controlled by the government...

Okay, so let's nail it down, is it okay for a business to day, "We don't Serve N****rs!" if they are saying it without prompting from the government? Or to refuse to rent an apartment on the same logic?

Are you saying that racism is okay when practiced by private individuals, or only homophobia?

Now, the argument made by the couple was that this was their "religious beliefs", but I'm guessing they didn't check to see if every bride was still a virgin like the bible says they should be.

I'll say it...if you own private property...that is a business, which is actually private,property...you should be,able,to run that business,however you want, serving or not serving anyone you want....

the thing is....the government cannot mandate discrimination...that is where the problem came in in the past...the free market will overcome discrimination in private businesses..

For example...the bakers and caterers and photographers who refused to help in gay weddings...there were others who gladly served those customers...right? That is how the free market works...

Now in the days when the democrats were discriminating against blacks...they used the power of government to force all businesses to do it...so there wasn't a way around it in the free market because the free market was controlled by the government...

Marty, have you called your congressman for the repeal of Public Accommodation laws yet? They are the ones that have to do it...

No, because I know my congressman would never vote for it. And i do vote for is opponent every time, but i live in NYC so you know how that goes.

I've petitioned my local state senator about the SAFE act, and got a boilerplate (we know better than you blah blah blah) response.

I have to get a congressperson who would listen to me elected first.

Well, it seems to me that you are in the minority in your state when it comes to a DESIRE to eliminate Public Accommodation Laws. That's the down side to a democracy, eh?

a persons rights are protected from democracy (51% democracy) by the constitution. Or at least they should be, unless you clowns get involved.

So...a minority doesn't have to follow a law passed by the majority? ( With the caveat that the law is constitutional....if one feels the law is NOT constitutional, any ONE person can file a brief to have the constitutionality of the law reviewed.....if need be all the way to the Supreme Court)

Welcome the concept of a constitutional republic. The constitution is a limit on what government can do to the people, regardless of the will of the majority. It requires a 2/3 of each house and 3/4 of the states (or 3/4 of state conventions) to remove such a limit, or create such a limit.

Our problem is our courts are creating limits out of nothing, and ignoring other limits at the same time.