Legalize discrimination for same sex weddings

[Syriusly]

If you just want business's to be able to discriminate against gays- then you look to your local community or State laws.

Pay attention. This is a thread about discrimination for same sex weddings.

So you only want to end laws that protect gays from discrimination from business's- not anyone else?

 

[Syriusly]

Discriminating against providing services for same sex weddings should be legal, with the stipulation that businesses must conspicuously provide notice on their physical storefronts and websites. This solution should be preferred by both conservatives and liberals alike.

I'm a wedding professional and the three most common questions prospective clients ask me (in order) are the following:

Are you available on this date?
What is your price?
Do you serve same sex weddings?

I am more than happy to provide service to same sex couples. I probably lose 1 prospect a month because of the first question. I lose 2-3 prospects a month because of my answer to the second question. I have never lost a booking because of my answer to the third question. Willingness to serve same sex couples has become the single most ubiquitous expectation among engaged couples in the market for wedding services. Approximately 75% of today's client market will refuse to do business with a vendor who is unwilling to serve same sex couples; though most report that they did not think to ask most of their vendors.

So let's let the money do the speaking.

Discriminating against weddings for interracial marriages, for marriages for those under the age of 30, for those who've been divorced already, for those who have had sex before marriage, for those with two eyes, etc should also be allowed to discriminate against. Hell, let's annoy everyone and ban marriage for all those who don't have at least $5 million to pay in bribes to any government official.

You know, I'm going to approve of that message, so long as the same stipulation is applied. You want to discriminate against interracial marriage? Go ahead! So long as you have conspicuous signage on your storefronts.

What you're not getting is that the market does not like those kinds of things. We're letting bigots stay in business because nobody knows they're bigots. Discrimination is happening all the time in today's world, because discriminatory bigots are hiding in plain sight, continuing to get their fill of business, and simply masking their discrimination in other terms. I happen to know of one particular wedding planner who is well known within the local industry for being rabidly opposed to same sex marriage and flatly refuses to serve gay couples. It's pretty easy to do. All she has to do is say she's not available. She's actually so damn vile about it that she's alienated most people. But she gets plenty of clients who never know how much of a monster that ***** is.

But you stupid liberals don't actually care about any of that. You don't actually care about encouraging an inclusive society, you just care about government control.

However, you stupid conservatives don't actually care about people getting served. You stupid conservatives want to gloss over that there are reasons why these laws passed- that in some places there is such a majority of small minded bigots that there might not be anyone within that community willing to let blacks sit in their restaurant, or bake a cake for a Bar Mitzvah.

In such a community- a sign saying you don't serve Gays or Blacks might actually be a commercial draw

You really have no idea what you're talking about. The wedding industry is not a laundromat. Everyone needs laundry on at least a weekly basis. People need wedding services maybe once or twice in a lifetime, and overwhelmingly at certain ages. The people who are doing the spending on weddings are almost entirely Millenials. It's the younger generation who finds all the homophobia to be batshit crazy.

Oh, and another thing. In your desperation to paint a picture of dusty small town hickville communities where population 300 might make it impossible for a gay couple to find another service provider, you demonstrate your ignorance of the entire matter in the first place. The wedding industry is one of mobile services in population centers. The wedding industry does not exist in the types of backwood, middle of nowhere Mayberry you are inventing in your imagination. You really think there are alot of weddings going on in Hickville USA population 300?

I pointing out the historic reality.

But now that you have made it clear that you only want to legalize discrimination against gays- but not anyone else- I understand the point you are trying to make.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Discriminating against providing services for same sex weddings should be legal, with the stipulation that businesses must conspicuously provide notice on their physical storefronts and websites. This solution should be preferred by both conservatives and liberals alike.

I'm a wedding professional and the three most common questions prospective clients ask me (in order) are the following:

Are you available on this date?
What is your price?
Do you serve same sex weddings?

I am more than happy to provide service to same sex couples. I probably lose 1 prospect a month because of the first question. I lose 2-3 prospects a month because of my answer to the second question. I have never lost a booking because of my answer to the third question. Willingness to serve same sex couples has become the single most ubiquitous expectation among engaged couples in the market for wedding services. Approximately 75% of today's client market will refuse to do business with a vendor who is unwilling to serve same sex couples; though most report that they did not think to ask most of their vendors.

So let's let the money do the speaking.

A conspicuous notice?

Like this, I assume...

Yes.

That's why no one is just 'playing the race card' when they call you people racists.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Unconstitutional things cannot be made legal once the supreme court says something is unconstitutional.

If you amend the constitution it can be, and of course decisions can be overturned.

If you amend the Constitution. Absolutely. Go right ahead and do so. However this requires enough like-minded Americans....think you can pull that off?

Where in the constitution does it say a baker has to bake a cake?

It doesn't but federal law says that if you DO bake cakes as a business, you are required to obey laws against discrimination.

 

[martybegan]

Unconstitutional things cannot be made legal once the supreme court says something is unconstitutional.

If you amend the constitution it can be, and of course decisions can be overturned.

If you amend the Constitution. Absolutely. Go right ahead and do so. However this requires enough like-minded Americans....think you can pull that off?

Where in the constitution does it say a baker has to bake a cake?

It doesn't but federal law says that if you DO bake cakes as a business, you are required to obey laws against discrimination.

Actually federal PA laws cover mostly point of sale, sit down/stand locations, and hotels. It's State laws that make PA mean "every time money changes hands"

 

[SwimExpert]

Discriminating against providing services for same sex weddings should be legal, with the stipulation that businesses must conspicuously provide notice on their physical storefronts and websites. This solution should be preferred by both conservatives and liberals alike.

I'm a wedding professional and the three most common questions prospective clients ask me (in order) are the following:

Are you available on this date?
What is your price?
Do you serve same sex weddings?

I am more than happy to provide service to same sex couples. I probably lose 1 prospect a month because of the first question. I lose 2-3 prospects a month because of my answer to the second question. I have never lost a booking because of my answer to the third question. Willingness to serve same sex couples has become the single most ubiquitous expectation among engaged couples in the market for wedding services. Approximately 75% of today's client market will refuse to do business with a vendor who is unwilling to serve same sex couples; though most report that they did not think to ask most of their vendors.

So let's let the money do the speaking.

A conspicuous notice?

Like this, I assume...

Yes.

That's why no one is just 'playing the race card' when they call you people racists.

As a matter of fact, nothing about this discussion has anything to do with race. You're the one who has brought up race, and purposely tried to inject a fallacious equivocation into the discussion, just so that you could deflect the matter into an excuse for an ad hominem.

In fact, you are playing the race card.

******* idiot.

 

[SwimExpert]

If you just want business's to be able to discriminate against gays- then you look to your local community or State laws.

Pay attention. This is a thread about discrimination for same sex weddings.

So you only want to end laws that protect gays from discrimination from business's- not anyone else?

More narrow still. I am only talking about services for same sex weddings.

 

[Syriusly]

If you just want business's to be able to discriminate against gays- then you look to your local community or State laws.

Pay attention. This is a thread about discrimination for same sex weddings.

So you only want to end laws that protect gays from discrimination from business's- not anyone else?

More narrow still. I am only talking about services for same sex weddings.

Okay- so only gays will not be protected from discrimination when it comes to weddings. A business still couldn't refuse to marry an African American couple, or a Jewish couple- simply by putting up a sign in their window saying: "No Blacks Allowed"?

 

[Syriusly]

Discriminating against providing services for same sex weddings should be legal, with the stipulation that businesses must conspicuously provide notice on their physical storefronts and websites. This solution should be preferred by both conservatives and liberals alike.

I'm a wedding professional and the three most common questions prospective clients ask me (in order) are the following:

Are you available on this date?
What is your price?
Do you serve same sex weddings?

I am more than happy to provide service to same sex couples. I probably lose 1 prospect a month because of the first question. I lose 2-3 prospects a month because of my answer to the second question. I have never lost a booking because of my answer to the third question. Willingness to serve same sex couples has become the single most ubiquitous expectation among engaged couples in the market for wedding services. Approximately 75% of today's client market will refuse to do business with a vendor who is unwilling to serve same sex couples; though most report that they did not think to ask most of their vendors.

So let's let the money do the speaking.

A conspicuous notice?

Like this, I assume...

Yes.

That's why no one is just 'playing the race card' when they call you people racists.

As a matter of fact, nothing about this discussion has anything to do with race. You're the one who has brought up race, and purposely tried to inject a fallacious equivocation into the discussion, just so that you could deflect the matter into an excuse for an ad hominem.

In fact, you are playing the race card.

******* idiot.

You are the one who wanted to discuss laws which prohibit discrimination by business's.

Weirdly you seem to think that a business that does weddings isn't subject to the same laws as everyone else.

You are the one who wants a business that conducts weddings to be able to discriminate against gays- but only gays- by putting up a sign.

But that same business could not discriminate against say Jews or Blacks or Mexicans- by putting up a sign.

So you are asking for an extremely narrow cutout- to remove Gays- and ONLY gays- from local and state public accommodation laws.

******* idiot.

 

[SwimExpert]

You are the one who wants a business that conducts weddings to be able to discriminate against gays- but only gays- by putting up a sign.

If you're going to be intentionally dishonest then just go away.

 

[Silhouette]

Okay- so only gays will not be protected from discrimination when it comes to weddings. A business still couldn't refuse to marry an African American couple, or a Jewish couple- simply by putting up a sign in their window saying: "No Blacks Allowed"?

You're getting warmer. You might want to read the conclusions of Hively v Ivy Tech (7th circuit 2016). The 1964 Civil Rights Act only applies to RACE , a specific gender or a religion; and they found it DOES NOT apply to homosexuals. Which one do you think anyway applies to the loose-knit and murky behaviors-as-identity "LGBT"? And why? (ie: how would you rebut the 7th circuit's conclusion?)

 

[mdk]

Okay- so only gays will not be protected from discrimination when it comes to weddings. A business still couldn't refuse to marry an African American couple, or a Jewish couple- simply by putting up a sign in their window saying: "No Blacks Allowed"?

You're getting warmer. You might want to read the conclusions of Hively v Ivy Tech (7th circuit 2016). The 1964 Civil Rights Act only applies to RACE , a specific gender or a religion; and they found it DOES NOT apply to homosexuals. Which one do you think anyway applies to the loose-knit and murky behaviors-as-identity "LGBT"? And why? (ie: how would you rebut the 7th circuit's conclusion?)

What is there to rebut? Hively was the correct ruling as gays are not covered under The Civil Rights Act. You pretending that this case is somehow going to roll back Obgerefell is where the real hilarity begins.

 

[Syriusly]

Okay- so only gays will not be protected from discrimination when it comes to weddings. A business still couldn't refuse to marry an African American couple, or a Jewish couple- simply by putting up a sign in their window saying: "No Blacks Allowed"?

You're getting warmer. You might want to read the conclusions of Hively v Ivy Tech (7th circuit 2016). The 1964 Civil Rights Act only applies to RACE , a specific gender or a religion; and they found it DOES NOT apply to homosexuals. )

Well you are getting warmer- the 1964 Civil Rights Act applies to:

SEC. 201. (a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.

As I mentioned- this is the granddaddy of all public accommodation laws.

So Christians customers are protected against discrimination in all 50 states- but homosexuals are protected against discrimination in only those states which have passed laws similar- but more inclusive than the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Since the OP only wants to be able to legally discriminate against gays in his state, I am guessing that his issue is with State law.

 

[Syriusly]

You are the one who wants a business that conducts weddings to be able to discriminate against gays- but only gays- by putting up a sign.

If you're going to be intentionally dishonest then just go away.

What is incorrect about my summary of what you have proposed?:

You are the one who wants a business that conducts weddings to be able to discriminate against gays- but only gays- by putting up a sign.

If you think I am being 'dishonest'- you should be able to easily point out what part of what I said is dishonest.

 

[Silhouette]

So Christians customers are protected against discrimination in all 50 states- but homosexuals are protected against discrimination in only those states which have passed laws similar- but more inclusive than the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Since the OP only wants to be able to legally discriminate against gays in his state, I am guessing that his issue is with State law.

So then you'd be in favor of a federal law that forces gay graphic designers (under threat of financial punishment and losing their business license) to print huge highway billboard signs that say "Homosexuality is a sin unto God" regardless of the gay designer's personal belief system. Check.

 

[hazlnut]

Discriminating against providing services for same sex weddings should be legal, with the stipulation that businesses must conspicuously provide notice on their physical storefronts and websites. This solution should be preferred by both conservatives and liberals alike.

I'm a wedding professional and the three most common questions prospective clients ask me (in order) are the following:

Are you available on this date?
What is your price?
Do you serve same sex weddings?

I am more than happy to provide service to same sex couples. I probably lose 1 prospect a month because of the first question. I lose 2-3 prospects a month because of my answer to the second question. I have never lost a booking because of my answer to the third question. Willingness to serve same sex couples has become the single most ubiquitous expectation among engaged couples in the market for wedding services. Approximately 75% of today's client market will refuse to do business with a vendor who is unwilling to serve same sex couples; though most report that they did not think to ask most of their vendors.

So let's let the money do the speaking.

You know what else should be legal, castrating rednecks, bigots, and homophobes.

 

[Syriusly]

So Christians customers are protected against discrimination in all 50 states- but homosexuals are protected against discrimination in only those states which have passed laws similar- but more inclusive than the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Since the OP only wants to be able to legally discriminate against gays in his state, I am guessing that his issue is with State law.

So then you'd be in favor of a federal law that forces gay graphic designers to print huge highway billboard signs that say "Homosexuality is a sin unto God" regardless of the gay designer's personal belief system. Check.

If that same federal law requires Christian designers to not discriminate against homosexuals- I would be fine with that.

Check mate.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Let's legalize denying the vote to people who openly advocate for discrimination.

 

[Silhouette]

Let's legalize denying the vote to people who openly advocate for discrimination.

Even gay graphic designers who discriminate against Christian customers who want huge highway billboard signs printed that say "Homosexuality is a sin unto God"?

 

[Syriusly]

Let's legalize denying the vote to people who openly advocate for discrimination.

Even gay graphic designers who discriminate against Christian customers who want huge highway billboard signs printed that say "Homosexuality is a sin unto God"?

Even Christians who discriminate against Jew who want huge highway billboard signs printed that say "Jews are Christ Killers"?