Religious Right in Arizona Cheer bill that allows them to not act like Jesus would...

zitothebrave said:
Am I? I find it largely irrelevant in my civil rights belief. I think the fact that there are more than a few who don't have the choice is enough to make you believe that rights should be protected.

On a semi-related topic, what are the odds that there are more people choosing to be straight than choosing to be ***? I'd put healthy odds on that.
Click to expand...

Was there an answer in there?
 
zitothebrave said:
Well your constant submit, blah blah blah thing you do. Could easily slide it around.
Click to expand...

It's the truth though. You're view is that everyone must submit on this point.

And you had based it on your false premise that all LGBT are what they are not of their choosing. So they, as an entire block, are just like blacks.
 
Curious how ensuring a business takes picture of your *** wedding is a "civil right"

Also curious why the *** person's "right" to be served is always trumping the business owner's "right" to refuse service
 
sturg33 said:
Curious how ensuring a business takes picture of your *** wedding is a "civil right"

Also curious why the *** person's "right" to be served is always trumping the business owner's "right" to refuse service
Click to expand...

That was my point that Z is just choosing one set of "rights" over another. Again, it's just a power play.
 
sturg33 said:
Curious how ensuring a business takes picture of your *** wedding is a "civil right"

Also curious why the *** person's "right" to be served is always trumping the business owner's "right" to refuse service
Click to expand...

Because there are laws in place in most states that protect people from being discriminated upon.

As far as right to refuse service, there's no real gray area. You're into total equality one way or another.
 
zitothebrave said:
Because there are laws in place in most states that protect people from being discriminated upon.

As far as right to refuse service, there's no real gray area. You're into total equality one way or another.
Click to expand...

You're whistling in the dark. Sturg doesn't like laws.
 
sturg33 said:
Curious how ensuring a business takes picture of your *** wedding is a "civil right"

Also curious why the *** person's "right" to be served is always trumping the business owner's "right" to refuse service
Click to expand...

You can't refuse someone because they are ***. If you refuse someone's service because they may be *** or black, etc you need to find reasons to refuse the service other then the fact that are ***. It can be done.
 
zitothebrave said:
Because there are laws in place in most states that protect people from being discriminated upon.

As far as right to refuse service, there's no real gray area. You're into total equality one way or another.
Click to expand...

You're whistling in the dark. I don't like laws.
 
Krgrecw said:
You can't refuse someone because they are ***. If you refuse someone's service because they may be *** or black, etc you need to find reasons to refuse the service other then the fact that are ***. It can be done.
Click to expand...

Why can't I refuse service to someone who is ***? (Other than a bureaucrat told me I can't)?

Frankly, it seems like it should be the responsibility of the consumer to find a photographer that fits his/her needs. And it's the responsibility of the photographer to find a couple that aligns with his/her business/core values.
 
BedellBrave said:
That was my point that Z is just choosing one set of "rights" over another. Again, it's just a power play.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry that you see it that way.

I'm still not sure what "rights" are being infringed upon when a business is legally enjoined to not discriminate against someone on the basis of race, gender, or sexual orientation. The libertarian argument is IMO more compelling than the religious freedom argument. I simply don't understand how one's religious rights are infringed upon in this situation. Personal sensibilities? Sure.
 
sturg33 said:
Why can't I refuse service to someone who is ***? (Other than a bureaucrat told me I can't)?

Frankly, it seems like it should be the responsibility of the consumer to find a photographer that fits his/her needs. And it's the responsibility of the photographer to find a couple that aligns with his/her business/core values.
Click to expand...

Some bureaucrat didn't make the law. The people made the law. That's right—they decided to use their individual liberty to assemble and agree to be governed by laws. Then they passed some laws. Some were useful, some were not. One of the laws they passed prevented businesses from discriminating against customers on the basis of sexual orientation.

You don't have to like it. I'm interested in hearing compelling arguments against it. However, I think that you should drop the pretense that some bureaucrat is imposing this rule on free citizens.
 
sturg33 said:
Why can't I refuse service to someone who is ***? (Other than a bureaucrat told me I can't)?

Frankly, it seems like it should be the responsibility of the consumer to find a photographer that fits his/her needs. And it's the responsibility of the photographer to find a couple that aligns with his/her business/core values.[/

You can refuse service to someone is *** but you can't do it because they are ***. All the bakery has to do is fill up its walls with Biblical Mumbo jumbo and make the store uninviting to ***s, where they wouldn't want to go in.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top