LGBT Staff Won't Serve Christians

[Blues Man]

Sure. But that's not the interesting question.

Do you think a business has a right to discriminate? Should they have been allowed to express clearly, beforehand, that they won't serve people with anti-homosexual views?

If these people do not want to be hypocrites they would welcome any business that refused to serve Christians and defend their right to do so.

 

[bodecea]

I hear the deserts were devine!

But a bit dry.

 

[bodecea]

So...do you or do you not understand the concept of, "Breach of contract?"

Have you seen the con-tract?

 

[Marener]

No, this is a breach of contract case-open and shut.

How do you know the contract is breached without having seen it?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

If these people do not want to be hypocrites they would welcome any business that refused to serve Christians and defend their right to do so.

They can't have it both ways, if they demand a Christian to bake cakes, design web pages or photograph then they have to tolerate.

My understanding is the Christian group said oh well and moved on. The bigger faction

 

[Blues Man]

They can't have it both ways, if they demand a Christian to bake cakes, design web pages or photograph then they have to tolerate.

My understanding is the Christian group said oh well and moved on. The bigger faction

So then you think it's perfectly fine for people to hang a "NO CHRISTIANS ALLOWED" sign in their businesses right?

 

[Marener]

My understanding is the Christian group said oh well and moved on. The bigger faction

If that were the case, we’d have never heard about it.

Instead they went to the press to attack their decision.

 

[dblack]

If these people do not want to be hypocrites they would welcome any business that refused to serve Christians and defend their right to do so.

That's how I see it. But there's plenty of hypocrisy to go around - ie lots of Democrats who think the servers should be able to refuse Christians (or whoever), but bakers should be forced to bake cakes. The theme song of both parties is "It's different when we do it!"

 

[dblack]

So then you think it's perfectly fine for people to hang a "NO CHRISTIANS ALLOWED" sign in their businesses right?

I don't think it's "perfectly fine" - I'd boycott said business. But it should be their right.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Sure. But that's not the interesting question.

Do you think a business has a right to discriminate? Should they have been allowed to express clearly, beforehand, that they won't serve people with anti-homosexual views?

Sure.

Have you seen the con-tract?

I don't have to. There was a contract. This is not in dispute.

How do you know the contract is breached without having seen it?

Stop playing stupid. Unless you are not PLAYING stupid.

 

[Marener]

Stop playing stupid. Unless you are not PLAYING stupid.

The jig is up. You were talking out of your ass and it’s obvious. You can’t just act like a jerk to cover up the fact that you screwed up.

Unless you are a jerk.

 

[Hum Dinger]

If enforcing those standards requires government to force people to do things that violate their beliefs, that's very much the issue. Circular rationalizations not withstanding.

Yeah, they are. They are groups of people, sometimes just one person.

Yeah, they do.


No. We don't have to forfeit our rights simply because we're trading with someone else.

That's what this is really all about.

You are absolutely and amazingly wrong.

The government isn't forcing people to do anything - it's forcing businesses to do things. There is a difference between a person and a business. Businesses are a separate entity from a person or persons.

Governments have loads of regulations that businesses have to conform to or get shut down, and which do not apply to individuals. There's nothing new here.

Running a business requires a business license. It is a privilege, not a right. If your business does not conform to government regulations, then it gets shut down.

No one's rights as an individual are being forfeiting by making their business conform to regulations. If they don't want to bake a cake at home for any reason, they don't have to. If they want to run a bakery as a business, then the bakery has to conform to government regulations.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

You are absolutely and amazingly wrong.

The government isn't forcing people to do anything - it's forcing businesses to do things. There is a difference between a person and a business. Businesses are a separate entity from a person or persons.

Governments have loads of regulations that businesses have to conform to or get shut down, and which do not apply to individuals. There's nothing new here.

Running a business requires a business license. It is a privilege, not a right. If your business does not conform to government regulations, then it gets shut down.

No one's rights as an individual are being forfeiting by making their business conform to regulations. If they don't want to bake a cake at home for any reason, they don't have to. If they want to run a bakery as a business, then the bakery has to conform to government regulations.

Are "businesses" mindless Borg collectives then.. void of people?

 

[Mac-7]

You are absolutely and amazingly wrong.

The government isn't forcing people to do anything - it's forcing businesses to do things. There is a difference between a person and a business. Businesses are a separate entity from a person or persons.

Governments have loads of regulations that businesses have to conform to or get shut down, and which do not apply to individuals. There's nothing new here.

Running a business requires a business license. It is a privilege, not a right. If your business does not conform to government regulations, then it gets shut down.

No one's rights as an individual are being forfeiting by making their business conform to regulations. If they don't want to bake a cake at home for any reason, they don't have to. If they want to run a bakery as a business, then the bakery has to conform to government regulations.

Are businesses operated by robots ?

Of course government is imposing its groomer pedophile beliefs on real peoplw

 

[M14 Shooter]

You are absolutely and amazingly wrong.

Or not.

California court rules in favor of Christian baker who refused to bake cake for lesbian wedding

A Christian baker in California won a legal victory when a judge ruled in her favor after the state brought a lawsuit against her for refusing to bake a cake for a lesbian wedding.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Sure. But that's not the interesting question.

Do you think a business has a right to discriminate? Should they have been allowed to express clearly, beforehand, that they won't serve people with anti-homosexual views?

That's not the issue. Take the cake example:

Bakery sells cakes and makes special cakes as they see fit
- Gay people can buy basic cakes just as straight people can.
- Gay people can order special cakes, such as a birthday party cake, just as straight people can.

That's where it ends. Beyond that, a business is allowed to decide if it wants to create a special themed cake or not. It doesn't have to make a swastika cake for a Nazi, it doesn't have to make a muslim cake for their celebration, so it doesn't have to make a gay marriage cake for a gay couple. Every other group understands this, I don't get why the gay community thinks it's special.

 

[dblack]

You are absolutely and amazingly wrong.

Based on your previous posts, I accept the compliment.

The government isn't forcing people to do anything - it's forcing businesses to do things.

There is a difference between a person and a business. Businesses are a separate entity from a person or persons.

Nope. You lied about that in your last post too. Read my response again I guess. Or just keep pretending that forcing a business to do something doesn't involve forcing people to do things.

Governments have loads of regulations that businesses have to conform to or get shut down, and which do not apply to individuals. There's nothing new here.

Indeed. Intrusive state regulation is as old as totalitarian government.

Running a business requires a business license. It is a privilege, not a right. If your business does not conform to government regulations, then it gets shut down.

I don't agree. Some of you want everything to considered a "privilege", you want a society where we essentially need permission from the government for everything we do. Your "vision" for the world blows. Get a new one.

 

[Hum Dinger]

Are "businesses" mindless Borg collectives then.. void of people?

A business is not a person. If people are offended by the business practices forced by government regulations, they can find another job or close down the business.

There is nothing new about governments regulating businesses.

 

[Hum Dinger]

Based on your previous posts, I accept the compliment.

Nope. You lied about that in your last post too. Read my response again I guess. Or just keep pretending that forcing a business to do something doesn't involve forcing people to do things.

Indeed. Intrusive state regulation is as old as totalitarian government.


I don't agree. Some of you want everything to considered a "privilege", you want a society where we essentially need permission from the government for everything we do. Your "vision" for the world blows. Get a new one.

There's nothing new about what you call "my vision' of the world. Governments have been regulating business since the beginnings of civilization.

If you didn't know it, you do not even have a right to drive a car on public roads. That's a privilege.

Sorry if you're so unaware of life's realities.

 

[dblack]

Are "businesses" mindless Borg collectives then.. void of people?

It's easier to rationalize abusing people if you dehumanize them first. Then, you're not bullying "people" - just "businesses".