Can't believe i live next door to these assholes.......

Aww, now you're offended and are going home.



Shame.

 

Sorry Beoyitch, I've done my 40 hours and I'm not sticking around here to try and understand your sexuality. Hope that's OK.

 

Waaaaahhhhhhhh! The bible humpers don't like me!


Waaaaaahhhhhhhhh! The queers are all homo and shit!



Waaaaaahhhhhhhhh! The fucking government is forcing me to do business with people I don't want to!


Which of these three things actually forces you to do something?

So let's get down to the brass tacks of it: you can have either free association, or forced integration. Which do you choose?

 

The state hasn't required the businesses to infringe on your beliefs, they've only given them the option of free will. I don't think theres a good balance between the two that government can mandate so I would just assume they stay out of it.

 

And yet, you are questioning my exercise of free will to boycott that state and its businesses because I believe they are not only un-Christian, but are fundamentally wrong. And my constitutional right of free speech to rally others to my cause.

All swords have two edges and cut both ways.

Note to the Egged one:

If you don't want to do business with the public, don't open a retail business. No one is forcing anything on anyone.

 

what about samurai swords? or chinese broadswords? or thai swords? or revolutionary war general ceremonial swords? or pirate swords? or machettes?

 

I think most people are fairly accepting by nature, but there is a big difference in acceptance and participation. Making a cake for someone is one thing. Being required to decorate that cake in a fashion that goes counter to your beliefs is another thing altogether. Being forced to take photographs of an activity that you find sinful or inappropriate should not be a concern for a small business person. If someone were to demand a photographic record of the consummation of a marriage, should they be catered too? As usual with all demands of this nature, there seem to be no boundaries.

 

There are,
but they had best not act like black women.

 

This is a disconnect for me.

You say making a cake is one thing, but finishing it with the requested decoration is completely different.

I see all of that, including the decoration as just making a cake.

Now, if you told me I'd have to show up for the ceremony, fake joy at the event,cut the cake and pass it out at the reception, well then you might have a point. But merely making the cake? I don't see the burden of it.

 

No. I am questioning your rationale in tarring every business and resident of a diverse state with the same brush. I'm not sure that practicing your own form of discrimination really furthers your agenda.

 

What if you were a graphic designer and I wanted you to make me a banner proclaiming "All fags are going to hell"? I don't want you to come to my rally, just provide me with a product. Would you feel burdened?

 

Im questioning the big brush youre using to paint everyone in that state as a bunch of homophobes by refusing to go there.

Yes, the sword cuts both ways. Unfortunately Im not willing to trade one right for another though.

You just won hypocritical statement of the day.

 

The government forces these business to meet fire codes and forces them to comply with commerce laws too.

Enough with government force!

 

"Kill all the white man" by NOFX comes singing in my ear when I read this thread...

 

Horse shit.

Free association is an absolute. You can no more demand that Jesus' Bakery make you a wedding cake than can Westboro Baptist demand you wire their A/V setup.

Business is a *free* exchange of goods and services. Much as your boycott of Putnam is your choice to undertake. See, no one is saying you have to ride there, are they?

 

It's not hypothetical for me. I've had several printers refuse to publish newsletters. An organization I belong to was refused IT services by an on-line provider to non-profits . I've had a number of suppliers refuse to provide services in several other situations. I've been refused service at a restaurant in my own neighborhood.

In some of those cases, the refusal may have been justified. In others, not. In every case, I/we found another provider. In every case, it was a disruption and costly. No, we did not file complaints.

I sell TV studio equipment. My customers include religious broadcasters. Does my skin crawl when I enter their facilities? yes. Do I do it? yes. Do I treat those customers as I would like to be treated? yes. My integrity demands it, and my employer does not discriminate.

If I owned the business, would I sell to these people? Most likely. They are entitled to hold and advocate for their views, no matter how wrong and distasteful I find them. Is there a line? probably.

 

If fart had his way there would be no fire codes either!

 

If I had my way there would be more reasonable fire codes. The code business is now more about protecting the insurers assets that protecting the public (along with a windfall for those propagating and administering the codes).

 

Would you make me my banner? How about if you were required to by law? Should you have to do something you find abhorrent in the interest of fair and equal treatment? Or, would we both be better off if I just went down the street to Bigots R Us Sign and Novelty Shoppe? Can I demand that the parish priest give me communion even though I live contrary to Catholic dogma? I simply don't understand why one individual would even consider asking another to perform an action that goes against their deeply held convictions. Peace and harmony does not lie along that path.

 

Free association is an absolute in non-commercial settings.

Once you open a business to serve the public, you are subject to the standards that are set for all business, including the societal and statutory standards for non-discrimination.

You don't get to operate a business with the blessing and protection of the state without following its rules and regulations.

It used to be OK not to serve racial minorities. It used to be acceptable to refuse service based on male/female. It used to be acceptable to not serve gays.

Time moves forward, and society's view and norms change. The society is moving towards complete acceptance of gays as full members of society. Like other changes before it, there is resistance to this by some who wish to hold on to the old ways. The current laws are similar in intent to the Jim Crow laws passed in the first part of the last century. They are as wrong and misguided as those, and they will eventually fail.