Tim Cook 'deeply disappointed' by new Indiana anti-gay law

2456728

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 551
    waterrocketswaterrockets Posts: 1,231member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sestewart View Post

     

    If they don't like it, they can go somewhere else. Businesses retain the right to refuse service to anyone.


     

    This is only legally supported if there is a legitimate business reason to refuse service. There is no legitimate business reason to refuse to sell Tim Cook a hamburger in a hamburger restaurant, but they can do it in Indiana if the restaurant owner hates him.

     

    Ridiculous.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 551
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TzTerri View Post

     




    Awesome post.

     

    Thank you.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 551
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 2,032member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

     

     

    You don't have the slightest understanding of how the Constitution works in this country.

     

    Just because you don't like, for example Jews, doesn't mean that you can say to some guy who walks in with a yamulke, "No I won't serve you."




    Sorry, but I have a much better understanding of Freedom, the Constitution, and the situation than you do.

     

    A business person SHOULD be able to say to the Jew, no, I won't serve you.  He shouldn't, and we would all have the right to protest on public property outside his store or establishment (and I would be there too because I don't believe in that sort of behavior of refusing the service myself), but that business person should have the right.   That is true freedom.  To recognize people we disagree with and their rights.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 551
    hypoluxahypoluxa Posts: 703member

    The only scenario that would imply refusing to serve someone that is legal I can think of, is at a bar where the bartender refused to serve someone if they are visibly drunk.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 551
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by chadbag View Post

     



    Sorry, but I have a much better understanding of Freedom, the Constitution, and the situation than you do.  If anyone is the moron, I would look in the mirror.

     

    A business person SHOULD be able to say to the Jew, no, I won't serve you.  He shouldn't, and we would all have the right to protest on public property outside his store or establishment (and I would be there too because I don't believe in that sort of behavior of refusing the service myself), but that business person should have the right.   That is true freedom.  To recognize people we disagree with and their rights.




    *headdesk*

     

    I cannot believe how many racists are on this board.  It's amazing.  Seriously: GTFO!

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 551
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 2,032member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

     



    Awesome post.

     

    Thank you.




    Stupid post.    The anti Indiana law people are like Communists or Fascists.  My way, or the highway.

     

    We should force others to do exactly as we want them to do.   We should discriminate against others because we disagree with them.

     

    Is that really what you believe in?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 27 of 551
    aaronj wrote: »
    I'm sorry, and yes, this is a person attack, but you're a moron.  And no you don't have the slightest understanding of how the Constitution works in this country.

    Just because you don't like, for example Jews, doesn't mean that you can say to some guy who walks in with a yamulke, "No I won't serve you."  If you really believe that, then you really are as stupid as you seem.

    You should look in the mirror sometime before questioning the intelligence of others.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 28 of 551
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hypoluxa View Post

     

    The only scenario that would imply refusing to serve someone that is legal I can think of, is at a bar where the bartender refused to serve someone if they are visibly drunk.




    Which is a situation I've actually been in.  And yes, that and the bartender taking your keys, for example, are perfect examples of refusing service for a very good reason.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 29 of 551
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 2,032member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by waterrockets View Post

     

     

    This is only legally supported if there is a legitimate business reason to refuse service. There is no legitimate business reason to refuse to sell Tim Cook a hamburger in a hamburger restaurant, but they can do it in Indiana if the restaurant owner hates him.

     

    Ridiculous.




    No.  Except for "protected classes" a business can legally, right now, refuse to do business with ANYONE THEY WANT.  If someone is an Android lover, and owns a hamburger restaurant, and Tim Cook comes in and wants to buy a hamburger, that restaurant, right now, can legally refuse to do service with him.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 30 of 551
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 2,032member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hypoluxa View Post

     

    As a fellow mid-westerner (Ohio originally) but living in Portland OR. now, this sickens me. Blatant discrimination. Who the f*&% in their right mind could not see this for what it is? Indy's governor should be asked to resign. What a jackass. All anybody has to do is replace 'gay' with 'black' to get the point.


     

    But it is not discrimination to force a religious person to perform an act they are opposed to due to their belief system? 

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 31 of 551
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by chadbag View Post

     



    Stupid post.    The anti Indiana law people are like Communists or Fascists.  My way, or the highway.

     

    We should force others to do exactly as we want them to do.   We should discriminate against others because we disagree with them.

     

    Is that really what you believe in?


     

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post





    You should look in the mirror sometime before questioning the intelligence of others.



    You both should spend more time on your StormFront site, and less here.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 32 of 551
    magman1979magman1979 Posts: 1,301member
    chadbag wrote: »
    It is not an anti-gay law. That is misinformation.

    It is a law for freedom of association. You cannot force people to associate with people they don't want to associate with.

    chadbag wrote: »


    Yes, I am from the US, and I am close to 50, and have a very good idea of what the US constitution says.  

    You cannot go to people and force them to associate with people they don't want to associate with.  It works both ways.  Religious people cannot go to the gay baker and force him to make a cake celebrating "traditional marriage."      And a baker has the right to deny a request to make a Nazi-themed cake for a party of skinheads.

    Businesses have the right to refuse business for any reason.  The courts have limited this to a small extent (such as race) but in general true freedom means we have to allow people to discriminate when they are asked to perform services.   

    Legally it can't but it should be for any reason including race, orientation, or anything.  It is wrong to discriminate for those reasons, but a business should be able to refuse to do business with anyone they want.

    I certainly would not refuse to do business with black people, brown people, white people, purple people, gay people, straight people, etc. myself. I look at the person and if they are a trustworthy business partner I do business.  When I was in business for myself, I dealt with everybody who could legally enter into business relationships.   But we cannot discriminate against people's belief system by forcing them to do business with people they would rather not associate with.  2 wrongs don't make a right.

    chadbag wrote: »


    Anyone who believes the Indiana law is wrong for the country is a fool and does not understand freedom or the Constitution and why this country came to be.     I am not advocating discrimination in either case, but those who oppose the Indiana law are discriminating just as much as those who want to refuse to do business under the Indiana law.  

    You have to err on the side of those who are approached about doing the business, i.e., the business owner.  They are not going out and forcing people they disagree with to change.   They are being approached and being asked to perform a service.  They have the right to say no.

    No wonder the great US of A is going to hell in a hand basket at an alarming rate, people like you are sinking it, and making enemies all over the world.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 33 of 551
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 2,032member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

     

    *headdesk*

     

    I cannot believe how many racists are on this board.  It's amazing.  Seriously: GTFO!


     

    I have not seen any racists on this board.  Advocating for freedom, even if that freedom is exercised in ways I disagree with, is not racist.

     

    People who want to control and force people to behave the way they want them to.  And are such shallow thinkers that they cannot understand the more basic principles behind the issues.  Like actual Freedom.   Something that seems to be foreign to most people here.

     

     

    Under Indiana's law, as I understand it, a fundamentalist Christian owner of a restaurant could legally refuse to do business with someone who had Utah plates on their car under the suspicion that they might be "Mormon", which is a belief system that many fundamentalist Christians violently disagree with for some reason.   And I have no problem with that (though I would be the one being discriminated against).  I would just choose a different restaurant.   People have the right to behave badly as long as it does not violate the rights of others.  And you have no right to force someone to do business with you, so the business owner is not violating my rights, even if he is being a donkey.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 34 of 551
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 2,032member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    give us an example of this act that would be against their belief system.

     

    Keep in mind Jesus had meals with prostittutes, criminals, and corrupt government officials.




    Someone who does not believe that it is appropriate for gay couples to have a wedding, due to their belief system, should not be forced to be a party to this wedding.  For example, as a caterer, photographer, or whatever.

     

    It does not matter with whom Jesus had meals with.   That is a straw man.

     

    As a follower of Jesus myself, I personally would not refuse the business of being a photographer, caterer, or whatever for a wedding of gays, but I recognize other people's belief systems, while based on a similar foundation, are different, and they should not be forced to be a part of it.

     

    The fundamental piece here is that these people are being approached as potential business partners.  They are NOT going out and approaching the gays and trying to infringe on their rights.  They are not trying to stop the wedding.  They are just saying they do not want to be part of it.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 35 of 551
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member

    Brilliant move by Spence.  

     

    Already many tech (and other companies) have cancelled conventions and other events in Indiana, and while the NCAA can't really cancel the Final Four, since it's next week, they have said that they will seriously consider whether to hold future events in the state.

     

    When the state of Arizona had a similar law proposed, the NFL said if you pass this law, we will NOT hold the Super Bowl in Phoenix. Guess what?  Same thing this time.

     

    So, the state of Indiana will lose BILLIONS of dollars over the next few years because they want to be able to say, "No, we won't sell a cupcake to a gay person."

     

    FUCKING BRILLIANT!

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 36 of 551
    boeyc15boeyc15 Posts: 986member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by chadbag View Post

     

     



    Yes, I am from the US, and I am close to 50, and have a very good idea of what the US constitution says.  

     

    You cannot go to people and force them to associate with people they don't want to associate with.  It works both ways.  Religious people cannot go to the gay baker and force him to make a cake celebrating "traditional marriage."      And a baker has the right to deny a request to make a Nazi-themed cake for a party of skinheads.

     

    Businesses have the right to refuse business for any reason.  The courts have limited this to a small extent (such as race) but in general true freedom means we have to allow people to discriminate when they are asked to perform services.   

     

    Legally it can't but it should be for any reason including race, orientation, or anything.  It is wrong to discriminate for those reasons, but a business should be able to refuse to do business with anyone they want.

     

    I certainly would not refuse to do business with black people, brown people, white people, purple people, gay people, straight people, etc. myself. I look at the person and if they are a trustworthy business partner I do business.  When I was in business for myself, I dealt with everybody who could legally enter into business relationships.   But we cannot discriminate against people's belief system by forcing them to do business with people they would rather not associate with.  2 wrongs don't make a right.


     

    . IMO- No one has the right to do what ever they want in public. If society says serve 'the public', or else;  if  a business owner doesn't like it, they have the 'freedom' to not go into business in order to not associate with 'their kind'--, quit and do something else, be a monk. Stupid rhetorical argument -yes, but no less so than the right to refuse anyone they please.

    IMO--If a business puts it self out 'in public' with customers... then they serve 'the public', it is not a hard concept. If business owner want to open a  'restricted private club' to avoid 'those people'---fine, just don't use any public money to do so.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 37 of 551
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 2,032member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by boeyc15 View Post

     

     

    . IMO- No one has the right to do what ever they want in public. If society says serve 'the public', or else;  if  a business owner doesn't like it, they have the 'freedom' to not go into business in order to not associate with 'their kind'--, quit and do something else, be a monk. Stupid rhetorical argument -yes, but no less so than the right to refuse anyone they please.

    IMO--If a business puts it self out 'in public' with customers... then they serve 'the public', it is not a hard concept. If business owner want to open a  'restricted private club' to avoid 'those people'---fine, just don't use any public money to do so.




    In the same breath, you probably support a business restricting the legal carry of concealed firearms in their business because it is private property, right?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 38 of 551
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by chadbag View Post

     

     

    I have not seen any racists on this board.  Advocating for freedom, even if that freedom is exercised in ways I disagree with, is not racist.


     

    Then you are living a dream world.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 39 of 551
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sestewart View Post

     

    Feel free to come to America and force a business owner to serve you. 

     

    We have the 2nd Amendment for a reason. 


    So people can threaten to kill others when they disagree?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 40 of 551
    elroy6elroy6 Posts: 12member
    I wonder if the people who support these laws really understand them, or if it's a result of fear-mongering from religious conservatives.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.