Arizona governor vetoes gay discrimination bill Apple rallied against

145791017

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 323
    lmgslmgs Posts: 63member

    This has nothing to do with hate, or religion, and everything to do with freedom..

     

    EVERY business should be free to do business with whoever THEY CHOOSE to do business with...   The government has no right to tell a private business who they HAVE to do business with..

  • Reply 122 of 323
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,985member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    I find it funny that the examples used for anti-gay businesses are wedding cake bakers and wedding photographers.

    That's probably the only time they'd be aware that the customer was gay, unless they went to Moe's bar and ordered a Flaming Moe. :lol:
  • Reply 123 of 323
    malaxmalax Posts: 1,598member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    I find it funny that the examples used for anti-gay businesses are wedding cake bakers and wedding photographers.

    Presumably because those are some of the few situations where there is any relevance to the business person.  If you go to the hardware store to buy nails, there's not much of a reason to explain that it's to build a house with your gay partner.

  • Reply 124 of 323
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,985member
    Really tired of all the gay issues ....

    Then cancel your subscription.
  • Reply 125 of 323
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    So how were they proposing to enforce this?

    A questionnaire filled out at the counter?

    A chart identifying what to look for?

    What happens if you're straight and wear stylish clothes?

    A couple of guys hanging out together?

    Taking your brother out to lunch.

    How do they judge, who gets to decide?
  • Reply 126 of 323
    focherfocher Posts: 645member
    All the anti-gay crap is no different than the discrimination people faced over their gender and race. People are bigots and disgusting, and time will show them as no different than the racists that were called out in previous times.

    Society advances, but many people don't. They do, fortunately, eventually die.
  • Reply 127 of 323
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    I find it funny that the examples used for anti-gay businesses are wedding cake bakers and wedding photographers.

    Yeah, I addressed that yesterday saying that the local Christian dry cleaners, grocers, and restaurant owners apparently don't have any issue taking gay couples' money because it doesn't directly threaten those Tea Party views of the one man one woman sanctity of marriage deal. They just look the other way and take the cash. But when it comes to a wedding, there is no looking away. They have to put two little same sex figures on top of the cake or when they have to shoot a photo of the marriage kiss it is in your face and they don't like it.

  • Reply 128 of 323
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,985member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    PS: It's funny that in TV shows and movies that if an actor plays a doctor, a pilot, a terrorist, serial killer, whatever we never once consider if they are really those things but as soon as they play a gay character we assume they are gay. I am guilty of doing this. It's funny, if a gay actor plays a straight one, like Neil Patrick Harris on How I Met Your Mother,, we aren't likely thinking, "He must really be straight if he's playing a straight guy."

    Like Job from Banshee?
  • Reply 129 of 323
    nhtnht Posts: 4,494member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

    While I agree with you on the discrimination issues, the Fair Housing Act is about rent and lending. A seller can refuse an offer with no reason given.


     

    I'm old so I looked it up in case I remembered wrong. :)  I hate quoting Wikipedia but I figure they probably don't screw up what might have been taught in civics class if they still taught civics:

     

    "The 1968 act expanded on previous acts and prohibited discrimination concerning the sale, rental, and financing of housing based on race, religion, national origin, and since 1974, gender; since 1988, the act protects people with disabilities and families with children.

     

    The Civil Rights Act of 1968 prohibited the following forms of discrimination:


    • Refusal to sell or rent a dwelling to any person because of his/her race, color, religion or national origin. People with disabilities and families with children were added to the list of protected classes by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988.

    • Discrimination against a person in the terms, conditions or privilege of the sale or rental of a dwelling.

    • Advertising the sale or rental of a dwelling indicating preference of discrimination based on race, color, religion or national origin (amended by Congress as part of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 to include sex[8] and, as of 1988, people with disabilities and families with children.)

    • Coercing, threatening, intimidating, or interfering with a person's enjoyment or exercise of housing rights based on discriminatory reasons or retaliating against a person or organization that aids or encourages the exercise or enjoyment of fair housing rights."

     

    Gays aren't covered so it should be fixed eventually.  I would have assumed that folks weren't dumb enough to pursue that kind of discrimination but I guess not.  I'm all for state rights and such but these are areas where the federal government should step in and given the stupidity in drafting such a law it probably will.

     

    Fortunately whether or not the federal government has the constitutional right to ban discrimination in commerce is a matter of settled law.  Yes, they do.

  • Reply 130 of 323
    focherfocher Posts: 645member
    lmgs wrote: »
    This has nothing to do with hate, or religion, and everything to do with freedom..

    EVERY business should be free to do business with whoever THEY CHOOSE to do business with...   The government has no right to tell a private business who they HAVE to do business with..
    Yeah, that got rejected in the 60s but thanks for your reactionary views.

    I assume you also include race and gender in your world view of permissible discrimination?
  • Reply 131 of 323
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by LMGS View Post

     

    This has nothing to do with hate, or religion, and everything to do with freedom..

     

    EVERY business should be free to do business with whoever THEY CHOOSE to do business with...   The government has no right to tell a private business who they HAVE to do business with..


    Depends on the type of business. If you have a restaurant, you cannot discriminate against a well dressed gay or minority from dining at your establishment but let's say an advertising agency or an architect where you have to be referred by an associate to even be considered, you can pick and choose your clients using any criteria you decide.

  • Reply 132 of 323
    nhtnht Posts: 4,494member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

    Of course not.  The wedding photographer is either up front about the conflict and the gay couple moves on, or if they insist, he tells the couple: Look, this is a really special event and I don't want to risk screwing it up due to my emotional conflict. You really should find another photographer for your special moment. Lets not put our opposing views into the mix. You really need a different photographer, sorry.  Simple as that. The only time a problem would arise is if someone, or their lawyer, wants to make a political sensation out of it.


     

    Of course not.  The doctor is either up front about the conflict and the gay couple moves on, or if they insist, he tells the couple: Look, this is a really important surgery and I don't want to risk screwing it up due to my emotional conflict. You really should find another surgeon for your important operation. Lets not put our opposing views into the mix. You really need a different surgeon, sorry.  Simple as that. The only time a problem would arise is if someone, or their lawyer, wants to make a political sensation out of it..

     

    Or maybe when they are the only doctor or photographer around or all the other doctors and photographers feel the same way and you have to drive over to the next state to get treated or pictures.  Think this is far fetched?  There are places where abortions might as well not be legal since you can't find a doctor to perform one.

  • Reply 133 of 323
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nht View Post

     

    Refusal to sell or rent a dwelling to any person because of his/her race, color, religion or national origin. People with disabilities and families with children were added to the list of protected classes by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988.


    Understood, but if they don't disclose why they refused the offer, there is no case.

     

    They just respectfully decline. That is why when ever I put a property up for sale I always say considering offers above x dollars.

     

    There are all kinds of people I don't want to sell to and it has nothing to do with race of sexual preference. I don't like like real estate speculators and I don't accept their offers.

  • Reply 134 of 323
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,709member
    Fun thread already.
  • Reply 135 of 323
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by focher View Post





    Yeah, that got rejected in the 60s but thanks for your reactionary views.



    I assume you also include race and gender in your world view of permissible discrimination?

    Freedom got rejected in the 60's??   I must have missed that..   Believing in freedom is a reactionary view??  Wow.   

     

    Like I said, I believe the government has no right tell any business owner who he HAS to do business with...   And yes, that includes race or gender..   Of course a business who does discriminate may not be in business too long, but that should be his choice to make..

     

    It seems most of the posters on here have already sold their soul to the government, and looks to it, to make sure they aren't "offended" by life..

    ?Grow up, deal with life, and take personal responsibility for your actions...  

     

    Now go ahead and show all that liberal tolerance, by attacking and labeling me, just because I don't agree with you...

  • Reply 136 of 323
    Should a black photographer have to photograph a Klan rally?

    The language of the bill seemed overly broad based on news reports, but this is the essential problem.

    Forcing a baker to make a cake for a gay wedding is different than saying refusing service to someone because they are gay, I.e. A birthday cake or something not celebrating their gayness.
  • Reply 137 of 323
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nht View Post

     

     

    Of course not.  The doctor is either up front about the conflict and the gay couple moves on, or if they insist, he tells the couple: Look, this is a really important surgery and I don't want to risk screwing it up due to my emotional conflict. You really should find another surgeon for your important operation. Lets not put our opposing views into the mix. You really need a different surgeon, sorry.  Simple as that. The only time a problem would arise is if someone, or their lawyer, wants to make a political sensation out of it..

     

    Or maybe when they are the only doctor or photographer around or all the other doctors and photographers feel the same way and you have to drive over to the next state to get treated or pictures.  Think this is far fetched?  There are places where abortions might as well not be legal since you can't find a doctor to perform one.


       Can"t find anyone to murder your baby???   I don't have any problem with that..

  • Reply 138 of 323
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nht View Post

     
    Or maybe when they are the only doctor or photographer around or all the other doctors and photographers feel the same way and you have to drive over to the next state to get treated or pictures. 


    Ok so you make good points but photographers do not take a Hippocratic Oath,

  • Reply 139 of 323

    I guess you're not getting the concept of equality.  Nobody is forcing anyone to provide a service they can't provide or don't know how to provide.  They're not forcing the ENT doctor to perform orthopedic surgery. They're not forcing vegetarian restaurants to serve meat.  However, if the vegetarian restaurant is providing vegetarian food, they have to provide it EQUALLY to everyone, not just whom they feel like.  They can't refuse to serve you a vegetarian dinner depending if you believe or don't believe in vegetarian diet.  It is none of their business what you believe otherwise, as long as you are there for the same exact and equal request for service, they have to provide you with the same exact and equal meal.  That's equality.  And yes, the wedding photographer can't decide he/she will categorically refuse service to some people and not others.  Frankly, I wouldn't want a hostile photographer to come and take pictures of my wedding anyways, but again, in a free and democratic society, we can't choose who will and who won't be eligible for equal services provided. 

  • Reply 140 of 323

    Rogifan,

     

    You are an idiot. Comparing gay rights to smoking cigarettes is a little short sighted don't you think?

Sign In or Register to comment.