Ignorant Homophobes fined $13,000 for refusing to host wedding

[bodecea]

Kinda related, but in my local CraigsList, there is a petition going around that businesses that actually refuse MONEY to buy a product UNLESS you give them a savings card or store card or give them YOUR address, phone number OR email, should be drummed out of business. I agree.

Radio Shack tried that shit with me. I picked up my cash and said "keep your shit. I will buy elsewhere" and they groveled while backpedaling. I still left. If I go in now, they know NOT to ask me that again.

Wow! Radio Shack is still around?

 

[Uncensored2008]

True, but entirely irrelevant to this situation.

If the woman who owns the farm hadn't decided to make a stand and inform the lesbian couple as to exactly why she was refusing to host them, there wouldn't have been any problems.

So the law is intended to punish ethics to stamp out the concept of civil liberty.

Yes, I was aware of this.

 

[bodecea]

So their freedom of religion must be trampled rather than tell the gay couple to simply go have their wedding somewhere else? Why would any couple want to have their wedding at a place that did not want to host it? Why would anyone do such a thing? Answer: To be mean and spiteful to people who disapprove of your conduct.

And there is nothing "dark and twisted" about not wanting to host a ceremony that you find morally offensive. This is not a "version" of Christianity. The Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman and that homosexuality is unnatural and deviant. So if you believe the Bible, you're not going to want to host a ceremony that you believe is offensive to God and contrary to Bible doctrine.

Can I ask you to show that the gay couple KNEW AHEAD OF TIME that the business would refuse them services over being gay?

 

[emilynghiem]

You don't have the right to refuse service for "any" reason. There are very clear instances where you cannot refuse to serve.

The Right to Refuse Service Can a Business Refuse Service to Someone Because of Appearance Odor or Attitude legalzoom.com

Like I explained to Bodecca ... The business is not required to provide you with a reason.

Anyone who wants to pursue the matter in court would have to establish the reason absent confirmation by the business owner. The burden of proof does not favor the plaintiff outside of flagrant disregard for civil rights.

.

True, but entirely irrelevant to this situation.

If the woman who owns the farm hadn't decided to make a stand and inform the lesbian couple as to exactly why she was refusing to host them, there wouldn't have been any problems.

so she doesn't have the right to exercise free speech

just like with that ordinance in Houston, if anyone QUESTIONS a transgender person
in the restroom or shower of a public facility, then that can count as harassment with fines up to 5,000.00

 

[emilynghiem]

So their freedom of religion must be trampled rather than tell the gay couple to simply go have their wedding somewhere else? Why would any couple want to have their wedding at a place that did not want to host it? Why would anyone do such a thing? Answer: To be mean and spiteful to people who disapprove of your conduct.

And there is nothing "dark and twisted" about not wanting to host a ceremony that you find morally offensive. This is not a "version" of Christianity. The Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman and that homosexuality is unnatural and deviant. So if you believe the Bible, you're not going to want to host a ceremony that you believe is offensive to God and contrary to Bible doctrine.

Can I ask you to show that the gay couple KNEW AHEAD OF TIME that the business would refuse them services over being gay?

The point is they sued afterwards, and pushed for a punitive fine,
instead of seeking to resolve this amicably.

If you look up the settlement in the Ebola case in Dallas,
the hospital worked with the family and agreed to help
set up a charitable foundation to provide medical help in Africa
in honor of the family member lost to the disease when he
didn't get diagnosed and treated sooner. The blame is clearly
a mix of things, and both sides seem to acknowledge this isn't onesided.
The hospital was trying in good faith, but mistakes were made.

Why can't more cases be settled amicably like that, where people
agree to an outcome that benefits the future?

Why this need to be hostile and punitive at someone's expense?
Why not focus on something they all agree is going to invest in greater good?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

So their freedom of religion must be trampled rather than tell the gay couple to simply go have their wedding somewhere else? Why would any couple want to have their wedding at a place that did not want to host it? Why would anyone do such a thing? Answer: To be mean and spiteful to people who disapprove of your conduct.

And there is nothing "dark and twisted" about not wanting to host a ceremony that you find morally offensive. This is not a "version" of Christianity. The Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman and that homosexuality is unnatural and deviant. So if you believe the Bible, you're not going to want to host a ceremony that you believe is offensive to God and contrary to Bible doctrine.

Can I ask you to show that the gay couple KNEW AHEAD OF TIME that the business would refuse them services over being gay?

The point is they sued afterwards, and pushed for a punitive fine,
instead of seeking to resolve this amicably.

They didn't "sue". They reported them to the state for violating the law.

 

[bodecea]

So...where is your example of any homosexuals being in a position to sue a black man's bar-b-que shack for refusal of service? How will we know if they would sue or not if we don't have examples to compare?

I didn't say they were going to sue the business ... I said they wouldn't sue the business. My point was that regardless of whether it is a business or a church ... It is the same people and same reason to deny a wedding as when they are in church.

I made the further point that they wouldn't sue the bar-b-que because it is owned by a black man. If they attempted to compare their homosexuality to the discrimination against blacks ... Well, I know the business owner and the district judge ... They would be laughed out of court.

Here ... There is no special state law for fining establishments that may deny hosting a same sex marriage. You can also post a sign here that reads ... "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone without providing any reason".

.

If the business denied them service for being gay, why not?

And as for NOT suing a bar-b-que place because it's owned by a black man....what does that have to do with anything. If I walk into a business owned by ANYONE and they denied me service because I'm gay....you bet I would report it to the state business bureau.

How the sam hell would anyone know you are gay???? Do they ask before paying for the product?

This is a theoretical....however, it is not uncommon for people to ASSUME that other people are gay for one reason or another...and often wrongly....

 

[Dana7360]

I guess there aren't many business owners on this board. There sure are a lot of people who don't believe that the laws and our constitution should be applied to everyone.

We have civil rights laws that say if you're going to be a public business you must serve ALL of the public. You can't pick and choose who you will do business with.

I don't know about other states but in my state when you apply for a business license you agree to follow all federal and state laws that govern business.

If you're a business owner you might want to actually read the document you signed and disply that allows you to legally do business in America.

If that business wants to discriminate then they better be willing to accept the consequences of their crime. Whining about it does no good.

Either the constitution and our laws apply equally to everyone or they don't apply to anyone. This isn't the 1800s where people can openly discriminate against anyone they want without any consequences.

For all those who are advocating for people to violate our laws, you just showed that you want to pick and choose what laws to follow. Which makes a mockery of claims of being "tough on criminals." You also showed just how much contempt and hate you have for our laws and constitution.

 

[bodecea]

So their freedom of religion must be trampled rather than tell the gay couple to simply go have their wedding somewhere else? Why would any couple want to have their wedding at a place that did not want to host it? Why would anyone do such a thing? Answer: To be mean and spiteful to people who disapprove of your conduct.

And there is nothing "dark and twisted" about not wanting to host a ceremony that you find morally offensive. This is not a "version" of Christianity. The Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman and that homosexuality is unnatural and deviant. So if you believe the Bible, you're not going to want to host a ceremony that you believe is offensive to God and contrary to Bible doctrine.

Where is it that freedom of religion allows one's business to discriminate against fellow law-abiding, tax-paying citizens?

 

[emilynghiem]

So their freedom of religion must be trampled rather than tell the gay couple to simply go have their wedding somewhere else? Why would any couple want to have their wedding at a place that did not want to host it? Why would anyone do such a thing? Answer: To be mean and spiteful to people who disapprove of your conduct.

And there is nothing "dark and twisted" about not wanting to host a ceremony that you find morally offensive. This is not a "version" of Christianity. The Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman and that homosexuality is unnatural and deviant. So if you believe the Bible, you're not going to want to host a ceremony that you believe is offensive to God and contrary to Bible doctrine.

Where is it that freedom of religion allows one's business to discriminate against fellow law-abiding, tax-paying citizens?

the same freedom of religion that allows the state to penalize
people or businesses for their beliefs, as in this case!

 

[bodecea]

So their freedom of religion must be trampled rather than tell the gay couple to simply go have their wedding somewhere else? Why would any couple want to have their wedding at a place that did not want to host it? Why would anyone do such a thing? Answer: To be mean and spiteful to people who disapprove of your conduct.

And there is nothing "dark and twisted" about not wanting to host a ceremony that you find morally offensive. This is not a "version" of Christianity. The Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman and that homosexuality is unnatural and deviant. So if you believe the Bible, you're not going to want to host a ceremony that you believe is offensive to God and contrary to Bible doctrine.

Where is it that freedom of religion allows one's business to discriminate against fellow law-abiding, tax-paying citizens?

the same freedom of religion that allows the state to penalize
people or businesses for their beliefs, as in this case!

Businesses have to follow state law to get a state license. If someone feels that their religion might clash with business law....why would they go into that business in that state? Who's forcing them to do so?

 

[BlackSand]

Businesses have to follow state law to get a state license. If someone feels that their religion might clash with business law....why would they go into that business in that state? Who's forcing them to do so?

The same reason homosexuals want to use businesses that have objections to the practice. See ... It doesn't make sense the other way either.

.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

So their freedom of religion must be trampled rather than tell the gay couple to simply go have their wedding somewhere else? Why would any couple want to have their wedding at a place that did not want to host it? Why would anyone do such a thing? Answer: To be mean and spiteful to people who disapprove of your conduct.

And there is nothing "dark and twisted" about not wanting to host a ceremony that you find morally offensive. This is not a "version" of Christianity. The Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman and that homosexuality is unnatural and deviant. So if you believe the Bible, you're not going to want to host a ceremony that you believe is offensive to God and contrary to Bible doctrine.

Where is it that freedom of religion allows one's business to discriminate against fellow law-abiding, tax-paying citizens?

the same freedom of religion that allows the state to penalize
people or businesses for their beliefs, as in this case!

No one is being penalized for their beliefs.

They are being penalized for their actions.

 

[Antares]

So their freedom of religion must be trampled rather than tell the gay couple to simply go have their wedding somewhere else? Why would any couple want to have their wedding at a place that did not want to host it? Why would anyone do such a thing? Answer: To be mean and spiteful to people who disapprove of your conduct.

And there is nothing "dark and twisted" about not wanting to host a ceremony that you find morally offensive. This is not a "version" of Christianity. The Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman and that homosexuality is unnatural and deviant. So if you believe the Bible, you're not going to want to host a ceremony that you believe is offensive to God and contrary to Bible doctrine.

Where is it that freedom of religion allows one's business to discriminate against fellow law-abiding, tax-paying citizens?

the same freedom of religion that allows the state to penalize
people or businesses for their beliefs, as in this case!

No one is being penalized for their beliefs.

They are being penalized for their actions.

Really?

Semantics is all you've got?

Beliefs with no actions are worthless.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

So their freedom of religion must be trampled rather than tell the gay couple to simply go have their wedding somewhere else? Why would any couple want to have their wedding at a place that did not want to host it? Why would anyone do such a thing? Answer: To be mean and spiteful to people who disapprove of your conduct.

And there is nothing "dark and twisted" about not wanting to host a ceremony that you find morally offensive. This is not a "version" of Christianity. The Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman and that homosexuality is unnatural and deviant. So if you believe the Bible, you're not going to want to host a ceremony that you believe is offensive to God and contrary to Bible doctrine.

Where is it that freedom of religion allows one's business to discriminate against fellow law-abiding, tax-paying citizens?

the same freedom of religion that allows the state to penalize
people or businesses for their beliefs, as in this case!

No one is being penalized for their beliefs.

They are being penalized for their actions.

Really?

Semantics is all you've got?

Beliefs with no actions are worthless.

And beliefs don't justify actions when they break the law. It's not semantics, it's a fundemental issue that you guys don't seem to get.

If I believed that murder was not only ok, but required for my religion, would that give me the right to kill random people on the street?

 

[SwimExpert]

Should a business be able to provide a business service to some, but not all, law-abiding citizens due to their declared religious grounds? Under the law that has to be a clear yes or no answer.

There is a problem here. You are dictating simplicity that does not actually have to exist. There is no legal principle that says legal issues have to deliver simple answers. Quite the opposite, legal matters often become quite complex. Your demand for simplicity would lead to fallacy of equivocation, as similar but distinct issues get compounded inappropriately.

"Religious grounds" is a two-fold issue. There's my beliefs, and there's your beliefs. If I refuse to serve you because of your religion, then I am discriminating, illegally at that. However, if I refuse to serve you because the type of service you want violates my beliefs, that is not discriminatory.

 

[Antares]

So their freedom of religion must be trampled rather than tell the gay couple to simply go have their wedding somewhere else? Why would any couple want to have their wedding at a place that did not want to host it? Why would anyone do such a thing? Answer: To be mean and spiteful to people who disapprove of your conduct.

And there is nothing "dark and twisted" about not wanting to host a ceremony that you find morally offensive. This is not a "version" of Christianity. The Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman and that homosexuality is unnatural and deviant. So if you believe the Bible, you're not going to want to host a ceremony that you believe is offensive to God and contrary to Bible doctrine.

Where is it that freedom of religion allows one's business to discriminate against fellow law-abiding, tax-paying citizens?

the same freedom of religion that allows the state to penalize
people or businesses for their beliefs, as in this case!

No one is being penalized for their beliefs.

They are being penalized for their actions.

Really?

Semantics is all you've got?

Beliefs with no actions are worthless.

And beliefs don't justify actions when they break the law. It's not semantics, it's a fundemental issue that you guys don't seem to get.

If I believed that murder was not only ok, but required for my religion, would that give me the right to kill random people on the street?

So because you are gay it takes that removes a businesses right to deny services.

 

[BlackSand]

And beliefs don't justify actions when they break the law. It's not semantics, it's a fundemental issue that you guys don't seem to get.

If I believed that murder was not only ok, but required for my religion, would that give me the right to kill random people on the street?

Yeah we'll ... That's what you believe, so I guess it doesn't mean shit.

.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Where is it that freedom of religion allows one's business to discriminate against fellow law-abiding, tax-paying citizens?

the same freedom of religion that allows the state to penalize
people or businesses for their beliefs, as in this case!

No one is being penalized for their beliefs.

They are being penalized for their actions.

Really?

Semantics is all you've got?

Beliefs with no actions are worthless.

And beliefs don't justify actions when they break the law. It's not semantics, it's a fundemental issue that you guys don't seem to get.

If I believed that murder was not only ok, but required for my religion, would that give me the right to kill random people on the street?

So because you are gay it takes that removes a businesses right to deny services.

No, the law makes it illegal to deny services because someone is gay - or Black, White, Hispanic, or for their age, or their gender.

It does not prevent them from denying service to anyone for any other reason.

 

[bodecea]

So their freedom of religion must be trampled rather than tell the gay couple to simply go have their wedding somewhere else? Why would any couple want to have their wedding at a place that did not want to host it? Why would anyone do such a thing? Answer: To be mean and spiteful to people who disapprove of your conduct.

And there is nothing "dark and twisted" about not wanting to host a ceremony that you find morally offensive. This is not a "version" of Christianity. The Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman and that homosexuality is unnatural and deviant. So if you believe the Bible, you're not going to want to host a ceremony that you believe is offensive to God and contrary to Bible doctrine.

Where is it that freedom of religion allows one's business to discriminate against fellow law-abiding, tax-paying citizens?

the same freedom of religion that allows the state to penalize
people or businesses for their beliefs, as in this case!

No one is being penalized for their beliefs.

They are being penalized for their actions.

Really?

Semantics is all you've got?

Beliefs with no actions are worthless.

If my religion made me believe I should not pay taxes that go to war....that's one thing. If I take the ACTION of not paying my taxes, do you think the government care that I did it because of my beliefs?