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

1356728

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 551
    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. They don't have to sell anything to people they don't like. 

     

    If someone doesn't like that, they are more then welcome to create their own business or buy from another merchant. 


     

     

    Precisely.

     

    Restaurants, for instance, are free to turn away whosoever they please. That is their discretion.

  • Reply 42 of 551
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 1,999member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    Yes it does matter.  Since many who say its against their religious beliefs view Jesus as God or the son of God.




    No, it is not relevant.    But if you want to make it relevant, Jesus did not actively participate with whatever "sin" these people with whom he was eating were guilty of.   And the businesses are not saying they have the right to not associate with gay people.    They just have the right to refuse to be forced to participate in things they disagree with.  The difference is a gay person could come in and get a cake made that says "Happy Birthday" and the person would not be refusing it (Jesus eating with the sinner).  But the gay person coming in to get a cake that says "Happy Wedding" with two "groom" figures on top is being forced to participate in an act he disagrees with (Jesus actually sinning with the sinner).

     

    And the law does not single out any form of Christianity as its basis.

  • Reply 43 of 551
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 1,999member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by droslovinia View Post

     

    So people can threaten to kill others when they disagree?




    The point went way over your head.

     

    He said "force a business owner to serve you."

     

    Anyone applying "force" to me can expect an equal amount of force back.

     

    He did not say you have the right to harm anyone with whom you disagree.

  • Reply 44 of 551
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

     

     

     

    Precisely.

     

    Restaurants, for instance, are free to turn away whosoever they please. That is their discretion.




    Wrong.

     

    But nice try.

  • Reply 45 of 551
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 1,999member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

     

     

    Then you are living a dream world.




    Really?  No, I am smarter than that.  I realize and am able to talk about and support basic freedoms, even if I am opposed to the ways some people exercise those freedoms.

     

    Again, look in the mirror.

  • Reply 46 of 551
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by chadbag View Post



    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.



    So I don’t have to associate with black people either or allow them into my restaurant? I mean if I can refuse service to a gay couple why can’t I refuse service to a black couple? 

  • Reply 47 of 551
    hypoluxahypoluxa Posts: 694member

    Another hypothetical scenario. If I as a private cake baking business owner had a customer come in and request to have me make a cake that had  "Kill all Heterosexuals" on it,  I would probably refuse them my service for that particular cake.  Why? Because it's promoting violence against a set of individuals who were born a certain way.  If that person wants to make that cake on their own, or take it to another baker they are more than free to do so. However, making a cake that said "Congrats Larry & Steve!" is not promoting violence against a certain person or group. That should not be an issue here. So some religious beliefs people hold are in fact discriminatory against individuals being born a certain way.

  • Reply 47 of 551
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 1,999member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

     



    Wrong.

     

    But nice try.




    No, for once, Mr Frost is correct.

     

    I often see signs at restaurants and business that say the business has the right to refuse service for any reason.  (It is understood that certain protected classes cannot be refused simply for being in that class).

  • Reply 49 of 551
    But but but think of the [S]children[/S] bigots...
  • Reply 50 of 551
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member

    Hypothetically speaking, could Tim Cook direct that all Apple entities in Indiana only hire Gay people and only serve them, thus comprehensively discriminating against 'straight' people?

  • Reply 51 of 551
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

     
    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.


     

     

    Or if you're being abusive to the staff.

     

    Or if you're dressed like a bum.

     

    Or if you're creating a public disturbance.

     

    Or if you're committing a crime of any other sort.

     

    Clubs freely turn customers away if they're not dressed correctly. That is also within their rights.

  • Reply 52 of 551

    So let me posit the following situation, I can post a sign that states, "no NiXX, KiXXs or ChXXs allowed" and that represents freedom for all in America? Well, except for blacks, Jews and Asians and anyone else you don't want in your shop. Please explain this, constitutional law experts. With that said, some of you would also approve of Westboro Baptist Church then?

  • Reply 53 of 551
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chadbag View Post

     



    Really?  No, I am smarter than that.  I realize and am able to talk about and support basic freedoms, even if I am opposed to the ways some people exercise those freedoms.

     

    Again, look in the mirror.


     

    The stuff you are saying is not even CLOSE to correct.

     

    If you want, I will tell you all the points where you are wrong, and I will give you a massively long list of Supreme Court cases that deny everything you have said.

     

    Do you want that?

  • Reply 54 of 551
    masnickmasnick Posts: 22member
    I think the Constitution protects private business from being forced to provide a service. Here's an analogy: I think anyone who limits their transportation medium to gasoline powered vehicles is bigoted against pedal power. To illustrate my belief and force the issue, I take my Schwinn to the local Ford dealer to get my tires replaced and my chain lubed and tightened. Ford dealer says no, because I don't own a Ford -- and the US Govt steps in and forces Ford to provide for my biking needs.

    If the government can force a private business to sell cakes to a gay couple against the private business owner's wishes, can the government also force all gay couples to purchase their cakes from that business owner?

    If not, why not?

    Opening the door for government to require provision of a service is a bad call.
  • Reply 55 of 551
    Jesus wasn't a bigot. He accepted everyone. He didn't use religion to justify his personal prejudices, either.
  • Reply 56 of 551
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 1,999member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    Why are you avoiding my question?

     

    I've asked it FOUR TIMES and you are still avoiding it.

     

    If my religious belief is that I should not associate with black people does that give me the right not to allow black people in my store?




    I am not avoiding it.  I have a real job I have to do and the replies are coming in MUCH FASTER than I can keep up with.  This is the first time I have seen your request.  Half the replies to this I have not seen yet.

     

    Yes, someone should be able to refuse to do business with someone if they are black (legally speaking).   No, I do not think that anyone SHOULD refuse to do business with someone who is black (I certainly wouldn't).  No, someone can't refuse to do business with someone based solely on their being black.  (And I am not agitating to change the law, even if I philosophically believe such a law is wrong -- the law itself, and not the outcome, as I don't think anyone SHOULD refuse to do business with someone based solely on the racial makeup of that person -- I do not advocate racism).

     

    If this position is hard to understand, I am sorry.  I also support legalization of drugs, even though I think drugs are stupid, should not be used, and I don't even drink alcohol at all, let alone ever have tried any drug myself.   I also think prostitution should be legal, even if I have no desire to visit a prostitute (and believe in abstinence before marriage and fidelity afterwards).   I believe in Freedom as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others in the exercise of it, and refusing do business does not violate the refused customer's rights.

  • Reply 57 of 551
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PBRSTREETG View Post

     

    So let me posit the following situation, I can post a sign that states, "no NiXX, KiXXs or ChXXs allowed" and that represents freedom for all in America? Well, except for blacks, Jews and Asians and anyone else you don't want in your shop. Please explain this, constitutional law experts. With that said, some of you would also approve of Westboro Baptist Church then?




    The WBC has a right to do their obnoxious, horrendous, terrible protests at funerals, et al.  Yes.  A series of laws were passed in the past few years that said that they had to be x (I don't remember the number) yards away from the funeral, but yes: They have a right to say what they want.

     

    Do I like them?  Absolutely not.  Do I agree with their right to free speech?  Yes.  

     

    PS: I don't think we need to worry about the WBC for much longer.  Most of them are old, and the young ones I have a feeling are going to be hidden off in other issues.  I could be wrong, sure.  But it looks like it's going to turn out that way.

  • Reply 58 of 551
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,729member
    chadbag wrote: »
    But it is not discrimination to force a religious person to perform an act they are opposed to due to their belief system? 
    If the act itself is against their belief system, perhaps no, but if a religious person runs a business where s/he refuses to serve certain customers because of sexuality, or race, or whatever, perhaps they should not be in that business. It is a stretch to call it discrimination against a business owner to refuse the business owner to discriminate.

    You have a twisted idea of what 'freedom' is.
  • Reply 59 of 551
    masnickmasnick Posts: 22member

    I'd suggest you yourself might wish to read the Constitution.

     

    Freedom of Association means I don't have to engage with anyone I don't want to engage with, for any reason or for no reason, unless I'm providing a publicly-funded service. The U.S. Government does not have the right to discriminate; private citizens do have that right. 

     

    If the government can take that right away from private businesses and private citizens, they can take that right away from you, and I can ask them to step in an force you to interact with me, even if you don't want to.

  • Reply 60 of 551
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

     

     

     

    Precisely.

     

    Restaurants, for instance, are free to turn away whosoever they please. That is their discretion.


     

    I think you should stick with talking about England.  This is the USA


     

     

    Because humans don't exist in America.

     

    Got it.

Sign In or Register to comment.