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

[JoeB131]

Once again Joethesimpleton can't simply take care of his own life, he needs government to hold his hand, tuck him in at night and wipe his widdle peanut after he makes wee wee.

At least you admit you're a loser who can't do life on your own, you need Harry Reid to do it for you. I give you props for honesty.

Uh, guy, expecting people to not defraud me is hardly being dependent on government.

You Libertarians want government to provide for you, you just don't want to follow rules or pay your fair share for it.

 

[JoeB131]

Think of insults as the fresh green garnish to my dish of actual content.

You don't have any content, that's the problem.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Ignorant Homophobes"

This is redundant.

Those homophobic are inherently ignorant.

 

[JoeB131]

Being a Jew is not sinful, nor is being a vegetarian, or a Minnesotan.
Being an active lesbian is sinful in their view, and celebrating something that condones that may be sinful as well.

No one is forcing them to celebrate it.

They are being asked to provide services advertised and promised.

 

[Pop23]

Those freedoms are to redress grievances with the government, not to discriminate against American citizens.

So, you hold that unless the purpose is to redress grievance, Americans have no right to assemble? The left has extreme hostility to civil liberty, but this marks a new extreme...

No bigot has the right to diminish the dignity of a customer. Gay customers aren't in the store to diminish the dignity of the bigot.

Yet the Right goes back to the old Conservative playbook in which we find that discrimination is defined as a Civil Rigjt. The playbook that the Conservatives used when they put up all the resistance to Women's rights, worker's rights, the rights of the poor, the infirmed,mother elderly. Seems egalitatarianism is anathema to the old line Conservative bigots. Redefining vices as virtues is right in that old Conservative wheelhouse.

Are there not citizens immune to your image hatred?

The delusional always feel they are being discriminated against. They are after all, delusional.

What makes homosexuals "delusional"?

The answer is obvious. A life partnership with a member of the same sex is delusional.

Sad, but true.

 

[Pop23]

I'm cool with it, I have gay friends and relatives. I love and respect every one of them. I would not attend a gay wedding if one of them decided to "marry". but it would not change how I feel about them as people.

thats what you lefties don't get, being opposed to gay marriage does not mean we hate gays.

again, like the racist who says, "But some of my best friends are n****rs."

You like them, but you don't respect who they are, because you think it's icky and your magic sky pixie says it's bad.

Black people are simply a different skin color.

Their delusions don't make them black.

 

[hipeter924]

You break the law, then you have to pay a fine. If people don't like the anti-discrimination law they will have to vote to repeal or amend it - no one can discriminate against x legally when it is against the law to do so. Same thing with selling wedding cakes.

 

[martybegan]

Wait, by hosting a reception, my beliefs are forced on them?

Yes.

Just as my using the implied violence of the law to force a Muslim butcher to cut and sell me pork chops is.

The only reason these lesbians chose this venue was to infringe the rights of the owner.

So...by hosting a reception for Jews...they are forced into the Jewish belief.
So...by hosting a reception for vegetarians...they are forced to become vegetarians.
So...by hosting a reception for Minnesotans...they are forced to become Vikings fans.

Being a Jew is not sinful, nor is being a vegetarian, or a Minnesotan.
Being an active lesbian is sinful in their view, and celebrating something that condones that may be sinful as well.

Being gay isn't sinful either...no more than interracial marriage anyway.

Oh, I know...you think you're right and the racist bigots were wrong therefore you get to discriminate and they don't.

Its not what I think that matters, its what each person thinks matters. and Homosexual acts are clearly sinful as per the bible. To deny that is to look, quite frankly, like an idiot. Now you can say YOU don't think it is sinful, but to make the general statement is an exercise in denial.

 

[martybegan]

Civil rights are not dependent on justification to you. Nor would you alter your war on civil rights if such explanation were offered.

Are you staking out the low ground and calling the 'right' to discriminate a Civil Right?

The right to associate, and to not have to compromise ones moral values are civil rights. Government should not compel either to happen if a person doesn't want it to happen.

Anyone who doesn't want to deal with anyone they find icky is a very lonely person indeed.

So there are zero people you find "icky" and would not want to associate with?

Sure...but in my business, I have no choice. I provide services for any law-abiding, tax-paying citizen tho many of them I would rather have nothing to do with for various reasons. It's business. Perhaps you are unaware of that being a PA requirement.

Do they all up and out say they don't like gay people? do they make you attend a celebration of not liking gay people?

 

[martybegan]

**** you, you prim smarmy atheist asshole. I may be ambivalent about religion, but I have far more respect for those of faith than jacket wearing pricks like yourself.

You are one of those sad people who see government as granting people things, as opposed to the way it should work, which is the the people allowing government things.

Die, you fascist pig.

No, guy, I see government as doing what government should do- resolve disputes and keep society running civilly.

You people obviously had no problem with most of our history when gays were routinely abused by society, but now that the homophobes are finding themselves with the shit end of the stick, you guys are whining, "Oh, I'm being oppressed because I have to do what I promised!!!"

So government is one big game of revenge? What an asshole.

And government should only get involved when the dispute is big enough and can have a big enough impact to be warranted. This is not a case of that.

 

[martybegan]

Think of insults as the fresh green garnish to my dish of actual content.

You don't have any content, that's the problem.

Say the board fascist. Go harass some Mormons.

 

[martybegan]

Being a Jew is not sinful, nor is being a vegetarian, or a Minnesotan.
Being an active lesbian is sinful in their view, and celebrating something that condones that may be sinful as well.

No one is forcing them to celebrate it.

They are being asked to provide services advertised and promised.

They are not advertising services for same sex marriage. You can call it the same all you want, We can even vote to make the state offer the license, but in the eye of their faith it is not moral, and no person should be forced to do something they find immoral.

 

[Nosmo King]

Those freedoms are to redress grievances with the government, not to discriminate against American citizens.

So, you hold that unless the purpose is to redress grievance, Americans have no right to assemble? The left has extreme hostility to civil liberty, but this marks a new extreme...

No bigot has the right to diminish the dignity of a customer. Gay customers aren't in the store to diminish the dignity of the bigot.

Yet the Right goes back to the old Conservative playbook in which we find that discrimination is defined as a Civil Rigjt. The playbook that the Conservatives used when they put up all the resistance to Women's rights, worker's rights, the rights of the poor, the infirmed,mother elderly. Seems egalitatarianism is anathema to the old line Conservative bigots. Redefining vices as virtues is right in that old Conservative wheelhouse.

Are there not citizens immune to your image hatred?

The delusional always feel they are being discriminated against. They are after all, delusional.

What makes homosexuals "delusional"?

The answer is obvious. A life partnership with a member of the same sex is delusional.

Sad, but true.

Certainly for you and me, but that does not mean that a heterosexual lifestyle is the norm for everyone. Homosexuals are not committing a crime by merely being homosexual. The heart wants what the heart wants. And neither you nor I nor anyone else should make someone who is different feel less than.

Homosexuals are, by in large, just as responsible, just as sober, just are pissed off on April 15th, just as patriotic, just as committed in their personal relationships, and just as mature as you and I and the majority of American adults. In other words, homosexuals are just as good a citizen as every other American citizen.

Business owners are claiming it's against their faith, as they interpret it, to engage in commerce with homosexuals. If you consider that, you too might come to the conclusion that faithed based discrimination is a way of thinking that would easily dovetail into all other faith based thinking. In fact, faith based discrimination is a tenet of the Islamofascists. Hardly good company and a paradigm for how the Land of the Free ought to operate.

Now, I ask you, given the qualities of citizenship shown the homosexual Americans, could you tell me why it can be right to intentionally make them feel less that a full citizen of the United States of America? How could that denial of citizenship, that denial of their dignity be regarded as a right thing to do, let alone a protected right?

Our traditions have always been to expand human rights, not erode them. Turning a blind eye to discrimination in any form is akin to justice delayed. And Justice delayed is justice denied.

 

[Pop23]

So, you hold that unless the purpose is to redress grievance, Americans have no right to assemble? The left has extreme hostility to civil liberty, but this marks a new extreme...

No bigot has the right to diminish the dignity of a customer. Gay customers aren't in the store to diminish the dignity of the bigot.

Yet the Right goes back to the old Conservative playbook in which we find that discrimination is defined as a Civil Rigjt. The playbook that the Conservatives used when they put up all the resistance to Women's rights, worker's rights, the rights of the poor, the infirmed,mother elderly. Seems egalitatarianism is anathema to the old line Conservative bigots. Redefining vices as virtues is right in that old Conservative wheelhouse.

Are there not citizens immune to your image hatred?

The delusional always feel they are being discriminated against. They are after all, delusional.

What makes homosexuals "delusional"?

The answer is obvious. A life partnership with a member of the same sex is delusional.

Sad, but true.

Certainly for you and me, but that does not mean that a heterosexual lifestyle is the norm for everyone. Homosexuals are not committing a crime by merely being homosexual. The heart wants what the heart wants. And neither you nor I nor anyone else should make someone who is different feel less than.

Homosexuals are, by in large, just as responsible, just as sober, just are pissed off on April 15th, just as patriotic, just as committed in their personal relationships, and just as mature as you and I and the majority of American adults. In other words, homosexuals are just as good a citizen as every other American citizen.

Business owners are claiming it's against their faith, as they interpret it, to engage in commerce with homosexuals. If you consider that, you too might come to the conclusion that faithed based discrimination is a way of thinking that would easily dovetail into all other faith based thinking. In fact, faith based discrimination is a tenet of the Islamofascists. Hardly good company and a paradigm for how the Land of the Free ought to operate.

Now, I ask you, given the qualities of citizenship shown the homosexual Americans, could you tell me why it can be right to intentionally make them feel less that a full citizen of the United States of America? How could that denial of citizenship, that denial of their dignity be regarded as a right thing to do, let alone a protected right?

Our traditions have always been to expand human rights, not erode them. Turning a blind eye to discrimination in any form is akin to justice delayed. And Justice delayed is justice denied.

Those that think monsters inhabit their closets are full citizens, but I do not want them in my business as an adult who think monsters inhabit closets.

A delusion is a delusion. Enabling delusional behavior helps no one (except maybe the closet monster)

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Wait, by hosting a reception, my beliefs are forced on them?

Yes.

Just as my using the implied violence of the law to force a Muslim butcher to cut and sell me pork chops is.

The only reason these lesbians chose this venue was to infringe the rights of the owner.

So...by hosting a reception for Jews...they are forced into the Jewish belief.
So...by hosting a reception for vegetarians...they are forced to become vegetarians.
So...by hosting a reception for Minnesotans...they are forced to become Vikings fans.

Being a Jew is not sinful, nor is being a vegetarian, or a Minnesotan.
Being an active lesbian is sinful in their view, and celebrating something that condones that may be sinful as well.

Being gay isn't sinful either...no more than interracial marriage anyway.

Oh, I know...you think you're right and the racist bigots were wrong therefore you get to discriminate and they don't.

Its not what I think that matters, its what each person thinks matters. and Homosexual acts are clearly sinful as per the bible. To deny that is to look, quite frankly, like an idiot. Now you can say YOU don't think it is sinful, but to make the general statement is an exercise in denial.

To seek to codify the ignorance and hate advocated by the bible is the true idiocy – in addition to being un-Constitutional.

That some might perceive homosexuality as 'sinful' is subjective, unsubstantiated, and legally irrelevant.

 

[Pop23]

Yes.

Just as my using the implied violence of the law to force a Muslim butcher to cut and sell me pork chops is.

The only reason these lesbians chose this venue was to infringe the rights of the owner.

So...by hosting a reception for Jews...they are forced into the Jewish belief.
So...by hosting a reception for vegetarians...they are forced to become vegetarians.
So...by hosting a reception for Minnesotans...they are forced to become Vikings fans.

Being a Jew is not sinful, nor is being a vegetarian, or a Minnesotan.
Being an active lesbian is sinful in their view, and celebrating something that condones that may be sinful as well.

Being gay isn't sinful either...no more than interracial marriage anyway.

Oh, I know...you think you're right and the racist bigots were wrong therefore you get to discriminate and they don't.

Its not what I think that matters, its what each person thinks matters. and Homosexual acts are clearly sinful as per the bible. To deny that is to look, quite frankly, like an idiot. Now you can say YOU don't think it is sinful, but to make the general statement is an exercise in denial.

To seek to codify the ignorance and hate advocated by the bible is the true idiocy – in addition to being un-Constitutional.

That some might perceive homosexuality as 'sinful' is subjective, unsubstantiated, and legally irrelevant.

Some perceive it as delusional.

 

[Nosmo King]

Are you staking out the low ground and calling the 'right' to discriminate a Civil Right?

The right to associate, and to not have to compromise ones moral values are civil rights. Government should not compel either to happen if a person doesn't want it to happen.

Anyone who doesn't want to deal with anyone they find icky is a very lonely person indeed.

So there are zero people you find "icky" and would not want to associate with?

Sure...but in my business, I have no choice. I provide services for any law-abiding, tax-paying citizen tho many of them I would rather have nothing to do with for various reasons. It's business. Perhaps you are unaware of that being a PA requirement.

Do they all up and out say they don't like gay people? do they make you attend a celebration of not liking gay people?

It might, at first glance, to be merely semantic, but you keep saying wedding vendors are forced to "attend" same sex weddings. There is a difference between 'attending' a wedding and 'working' a wedding. The vendors are just plying their trade. They are not required, nor requested to approve of the happy couple.

Could a restaurantuer refuse service to a walki in four top of homosexuals? I wonder what that restaurantuer's attitude might be on a slow Tuesday night? But the maitre d does not sidle up to the table, the sommelier doesn't bring an extra glass and make a toast.

And wedding vendors, with the exception of the waiters and bartenders and musical entertainment should be invisible. It's the bride's day, not the day for a vendor to grant his empremator even on the occasion.

 

[martybegan]

Yes.

Just as my using the implied violence of the law to force a Muslim butcher to cut and sell me pork chops is.

The only reason these lesbians chose this venue was to infringe the rights of the owner.

So...by hosting a reception for Jews...they are forced into the Jewish belief.
So...by hosting a reception for vegetarians...they are forced to become vegetarians.
So...by hosting a reception for Minnesotans...they are forced to become Vikings fans.

Being a Jew is not sinful, nor is being a vegetarian, or a Minnesotan.
Being an active lesbian is sinful in their view, and celebrating something that condones that may be sinful as well.

Being gay isn't sinful either...no more than interracial marriage anyway.

Oh, I know...you think you're right and the racist bigots were wrong therefore you get to discriminate and they don't.

Its not what I think that matters, its what each person thinks matters. and Homosexual acts are clearly sinful as per the bible. To deny that is to look, quite frankly, like an idiot. Now you can say YOU don't think it is sinful, but to make the general statement is an exercise in denial.

To seek to codify the ignorance and hate advocated by the bible is the true idiocy – in addition to being un-Constitutional.

That some might perceive homosexuality as 'sinful' is subjective, unsubstantiated, and legally irrelevant.

and the government should not interfere in said "irrelevant" perception unless some serious shit would be caused by it. A gay couple having to go somewhere else for a cake is not serious shit.

What is unconstitutional is government saying, you can hide your morals, but try to live up to them in public and we will fine your ass, bwahaahahaha!!!!

 

[martybegan]

The right to associate, and to not have to compromise ones moral values are civil rights. Government should not compel either to happen if a person doesn't want it to happen.

Anyone who doesn't want to deal with anyone they find icky is a very lonely person indeed.

So there are zero people you find "icky" and would not want to associate with?

Sure...but in my business, I have no choice. I provide services for any law-abiding, tax-paying citizen tho many of them I would rather have nothing to do with for various reasons. It's business. Perhaps you are unaware of that being a PA requirement.

Do they all up and out say they don't like gay people? do they make you attend a celebration of not liking gay people?

It might, at first glance, to be merely semantic, but you keep saying wedding vendors are forced to "attend" same sex weddings. There is a difference between 'attending' a wedding and 'working' a wedding. The vendors are just plying their trade. They are not required, nor requested to approve of the happy couple.

Could a restaurantuer refuse service to a walki in four top of homosexuals? I wonder what that restaurantuer's attitude might be on a slow Tuesday night? But the maitre d does not sidle up to the table, the sommelier doesn't bring an extra glass and make a toast.

And wedding vendors, with the exception of the waiters and bartenders and musical entertainment should be invisible. It's the bride's day, not the day for a vendor to grant his empremator even on the occasion.

A restaurant should be able to do so, and deal with the repercussions. What is more likely though is the owner wouldn't even notice it and have a chance to have a choice of asking them not to dine. Dining is dining, unless you are celebrating something that the owner does not want celebrated in his venue. Why can a hall deny a Klan meeting but not a gay wedding?

Forcing someone to provide a service they do not want to provide, or giving them the choice of going out of business is about as reprehensible as a person can get. that you wear the mantle of justice for some strange reason while advocating it is disturbing in and of itself.

 

[Nosmo King]

Anyone who doesn't want to deal with anyone they find icky is a very lonely person indeed.

So there are zero people you find "icky" and would not want to associate with?

Sure...but in my business, I have no choice. I provide services for any law-abiding, tax-paying citizen tho many of them I would rather have nothing to do with for various reasons. It's business. Perhaps you are unaware of that being a PA requirement.

Do they all up and out say they don't like gay people? do they make you attend a celebration of not liking gay people?

It might, at first glance, to be merely semantic, but you keep saying wedding vendors are forced to "attend" same sex weddings. There is a difference between 'attending' a wedding and 'working' a wedding. The vendors are just plying their trade. They are not required, nor requested to approve of the happy couple.

Could a restaurantuer refuse service to a walki in four top of homosexuals? I wonder what that restaurantuer's attitude might be on a slow Tuesday night? But the maitre d does not sidle up to the table, the sommelier doesn't bring an extra glass and make a toast.

And wedding vendors, with the exception of the waiters and bartenders and musical entertainment should be invisible. It's the bride's day, not the day for a vendor to grant his empremator even on the occasion.

A restaurant should be able to do so, and deal with the repercussions. What is more likely though is the owner wouldn't even notice it and have a chance to have a choice of asking them not to dine. Dining is dining, unless you are celebrating something that the owner does not want celebrated in his venue. Why can a hall deny a Klan meeting but not a gay wedding?

Forcing someone to provide a service they do not want to provide, or giving them the choice of going out of business is about as reprehensible as a person can get. that you wear the mantle of justice for some strange reason while advocating it is disturbing in and of itself.

The Klan is a criminal enterprise. Are homosexuals criminal by merely being a homosexual?