So, we can arrest Kim Davis now, right?

sturg33 said:
Excellent. So you're a total hypocrite.

If they're unwilling to serve the entire public, then they have no right to be in business (as I was told many times)
Click to expand...

Again: When salons start turning away christians, let's discuss it. Then we will have a similar situation (which I would not support). This lady is a cunt and that's why I'm cool with someone not serving her. It is not the same situation. It is spectacularly different. A regular old christian person who hasn't come out as a full-fledged bigot? No problem with them being served. Her? She's made her bed.
 
yeezus said:
Again: When salons start turning away christians, let's discuss it. Then we will have a similar situation (which I would not support). This lady is a cunt and that's why I'm cool with someone not serving her. It is not the same situation. It is spectacularly different. A regular old christian person who hasn't come out as a full-fledged bigot? No problem with them being served. Her? She's made her bed.
Click to expand...

But the bakers weren't turning away gay people. They simply wouldn't bake a cake for a gay ceremony
 
And again again: your hypotheticals are useless. it hasn't happened. what salons are turning away christians for being christians? has this happened? because that's an equal situation. that, again again again, hasn't even happened.
 
cajunrevenge said:
Cant reassign an elected official. In most cases they would fine her but the judge thought other people would pay the fine for her so thats why she gets jail time. But look on the bright side, now she has a lot more time to read the bible. Its a win win situation.
Click to expand...

Didn't realize she was an elected official. That makes what she's doing more reproachable. I agree it would've been more honorable for her to resign instead of forcing taxpayers to pay for her stubbornness.
 
sturg33 said:
I think that's a fair point. But with no mention of marriage in the constitution, I don't see how you can reasonably conclude the supreme court had any authority on the matter
Click to expand...

Frankly, I don't think the state has any right to exclude the contract rights of two people of whatever sex who want to form a family unit. In other words, I don't think the state should be in the marriage business. I realize that is an extreme stance and there are dangers in that interpretation of this stance is open to polyamory and group marriage, but I believe that would be the exception and not the rule. Again, as long as people aren't coerced into marriage arrangements and there are protections in the dissolution of the marriage contract, the situation likely wouldn't be that much different than it is with the state involved. Churches should be able to recognize marriages as they see fit. A civil contract does not, and should not, require religious recognition of the union.

When it comes to contracts, I'm probably pretty close to where libertarians are. In the absence of government involvement, things probably devolve into a "lawyers full-employment act," but it could eliminate a lot of hoop-jumping and minutiae avoidance.
 
and actually, come to think of it, i don't really care if a bakery turns down making cakes for a gay ceremony. that's their prerogative and as much as i think they're ****ty for it and it will end up being bad for business, they're a private business. i don't think i've stated otherwise. eventually that ****ty line of thinking will go away. these are prime examples of why religion can really suck, though.
 
yeezus said:
and actually, come to think of it, i don't really care if a bakery turns down making cakes for a gay ceremony. that's their prerogative and as much as i think they're ****ty for it and it will end up being bad for business, they're a private business. i don't think i've stated otherwise. eventually that ****ty line of thinking will go away. these are prime examples of why religion can really suck, though.
Click to expand...

I waffle on the whole "business right to refuse service" issue. I can see both sides. To me, it largely depends on context. There's a difference between someone providing a necessary service (food, shelter) and a non-essential service (custom cakes). I don't really buy the argument that access for gays equates access for African-Americans during the Civil Rights Era. The Freedom Riders and the lunch counter demonstrations were aimed at a comprehensive system of discrimination that prevented the rights of a race to do something as simple as drinking at a water fountain. As supportive as I am of gay people, discrimination against them, while still insidious, is not as systematic as Jim Crow was to African-Americans.
 
yeezus said:
and actually, come to think of it, i don't really care if a bakery turns down making cakes for a gay ceremony. that's their prerogative and as much as i think they're ****ty for it and it will end up being bad for business, they're a private business. i don't think i've stated otherwise. eventually that ****ty line of thinking will go away. these are prime examples of why religion can really suck, though.
Click to expand...

Then we agree. Thanks.

I think any business should be able to turn away any customer for any reason.

Many on this board say they do not have that right
 
I think private business should be allowed to turn away customers.

I don't think a government official should be allowed to refuse to carry out the duties of the office.

I also think it's ridiculous she is in jail. Tell her she has to do her job...if she disagrees, fire her. Case closed, IMO.
 
acesfull86 said:
I think private business should be allowed to turn away customers.

I don't think a government official should be allowed to refuse to carry out the duties of the office.

I also think it's ridiculous she is in jail. Tell her she has to do her job...if she disagrees, fire her. Case closed, IMO.
Click to expand...

Problem in this instance is that she's an elected official and would have to be impeached.
 
goldfly said:
I give you answers. You don't like the answers or that I will play your game

Seriously, show me a story of what he described and I will give you my thoughts. The "what if" bull**** is just that
Click to expand...

You have a habit of giving evasive answers. It is what it is.
 
cajunrevenge said:
Cant reassign an elected official. In most cases they would fine her but the judge thought other people would pay the fine for her so thats why she gets jail time. But look on the bright side, now she has a lot more time to read the bible. Its a win win situation.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sure wouldn't want other people paying bail or fines for her. No, she must stay imprisoned.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
You know, Foxworthy said something (roughly) along the lines of "there are plenty of smart people in the south, you just never see them on TV, when there's a disaster and the cameras are out you see some 300 lb woman with wearing a Mumu with her hair in curlers ranting on and on about something". There are LOTS of examples of people of faith trying to be good Christians, doing the right thing, etc., but the cameras are never around to capture that. Here are my opinions on these matters, all at once, for your viewing and ridiculing enjoyment:

1.) Refusing to do your job and grant a marriage license to a same sex couple despite a Supreme Court (and other courts too for that matter) order to do so-----Fail on her part. If following these laws is too much for you to take, get a new job.

2.) Refusing to make a cake for a same-sex couple, seems like a stupid business move and something that in no way encourages or discourages same sex relations should IMO be the right of the business in question, the government should not get involved in something like this. Rosa Parks managed to use the "free market" to correct these sorts of things, why can't today's folks who feel they've been wronged?

3.) Same sex couples demanding to be married in a church by a minster who feels this would be against his/her beliefs? I'd side with the minister, period. Oh and for those insist this will never happen, HAH!! It absolutely WILL happen, in fact I'm surprised it hasn't already happened.

OK, have a nice Labor Day and while you're enjoying it, remember that it sure as hell wasn't because of the "kind Christian charity" of management/ownership that this holiday that you're enjoying was established but because of those nasty labor unions, who really can be a "pill" sometimes made it so.

Surely this post ought to give everyone from all points of view something to be pissed about, so here you are, enjoy!!! :icon_biggrin:
Click to expand...

OHawk, would you be willing to read the following links?

Link1

Link2

Link3

I'm not ready to jump on the band-wagon with all those who are foaming at the mouth with hatred aimed at this woman or those who sneer from their perches of self-righteousness. Maybe, just maybe she's a woman who has been changed and is seeking to not go against her conscience. I still like Luther's famous statement:

"...to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. Here I stand, I can do no other, so help me God."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top