It's Starting--> Indiana Christian Pizzeria ATTACKED by gay lobby

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: NavyDoc

I'm not supporting discrimination--again with the straw man arguement. I'm against discrimination

BUT YOU YOURSELF!!! said that we should let business owners discriminate! So YES!!! you support discrimination!

He's not quite catching on to the "circular" going on here, is he?

a reply to: Annee

Ah, so dodge everything.

Even that comment is off because I'm not the one advocating the government force people to do stuff, YOU are. I'm advocating leaving people alone to make their own choices.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: NavyDoc

I'm not supporting discrimination--again with the straw man arguement. I'm against discrimination

BUT YOU YOURSELF!!! said that we should let business owners discriminate! So YES!!! you support discrimination!

No. I said people should be able to choose.

Like saying people should have the freedom of speech is not advocating what they are saying. You do believe in the freedom of speech, yes? You do often disagree with what some people say, correct? However you would still support their right to say it even if you disagreed with it, yes? Or do you hate free speech too?

originally posted by: NavyDoc
a reply to: Annee

Ah, so dodge everything.

Even that comment is off because I'm not the one advocating the government force people to do stuff, YOU are. I'm advocating leaving people alone to make their own choices.

You are trying to argue an idealism that might work on a small island for a short period.

It is not realistic in a population of over 300+ million people.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

I have said this before and I will say it again here..

A Muslim by law has the right to practice his religion in this country if it harms no one, which includes the right to reasonable accommodation at his work in order to perform his prayers, the right to refuse to handle pork and the right to refuse to sell alcohol, even if that place of business sells alcohol and pork products..

if a place of business hires a practicing Muslim, they need to allow reasonable accommodation for that employee.. this is the law.

If a place of business who makes wedding cakes hires a Christian they must allow that employee any reasonable accommodation needed for that Christian, which means if a Christian feels they cannot participate in a same sex wedding ceremony, that place of business, BY LAW, must provide reasonable accommodation and allow that Christian to refuse their participation.

Now.. the wedding industry as a whole is full of very small businesses.. a wedding photography company may only employ the owner of that company.. a baker might only have a handful of employees.. in certain instances businesses, in consideration of their size usually, cannot pull the only employee from the job and still get the job done because they are the only employee and so forth..

a business owner should never loose their legal protection to practice their faith.. no matter what that faith is..

there are going to be many many people who have no issues with this issue, but you are facing an industry that has been traditionally religious, and forcing overnight secularization of the entire industry, and then trying to take away individual rights to so much as practice their faith..

and that is wrong.. I don't have to agree with you to support your rights, nor do I have to agree with the Christians who say they would like to refuse in order to support their rights..

change never happens overnight, and we have these protections in place for very good reasons.. you never know when you may be faced with a situation where you will be that person who needs constitutional protection, and you will be grateful you have it..if you haven't thrown the constitution in the trash by then..

throwing the constitution in the trash because it doesn't suit you personally in this instance is NOT an answer, the answer really is, no doesn't hurt occasionally, and I am happier to be doing business with people who want my business, and give my dollars to those businesses I happen to prefer to support.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc
a reply to: Annee

Ah, so dodge everything.

Even that comment is off because I'm not the one advocating the government force people to do stuff, YOU are. I'm advocating leaving people alone to make their own choices.

You are trying to argue an idealism that might work on a small island for a short period.

It is not realistic in a population of over 3 million people.

But you make a claim without any support or evidence (and why 3 million? Just pull that number out if your butt?)
Your way is even less tenable in large populations because the larger the population, the less practible and successful arbitrary government mandates work.

a reply to: NavyDoc

No. I said people should be able to choose.

Ok. According to you business owners should be able to choose to discriminate. Right?

Like saying people should have the freedom of speech is not advocating what they are saying. You do believe in the freedom of speech, yes? You do often disagree with what some people say, correct? However you would still support their right to say it even if you disagreed with it, yes? Or do you hate free speech too?

That right there is a perfect example of a straw man argument. I have never said I hate free speech. What does the freedom of speech have to do with businesses selling products and services?

Gay Fox Guest Warns LGBT Movement Against Turning into Fascist Bullies

www.mediaite.com...

Conservative radio host and openly-gay Tammy Bruce said of Fox & Friends Thursday morning that the gay rights movement risked turning into fascist bullies in its response to Indiana’s new RFRA law, as embodied by the threats against an Indiana pizzeria that told a local news station it would not cater a gay wedding.

“If there’s anyone in the world who should understand the vulnerability of being a minority, of being somebody that maybe others don’t understand or relate to, the vulnerability about work and jobs, being able to live your life as you see fit, it’s the gay community,” Bruce said.

“For me to turn around in the 21st century and see that this is what we were fighting for, so we could condemn people who are different, and with whom we disagree is the antithesis of what every civil rights movement was about.”

originally posted by: OpinionatedB
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

I have said this before and I will say it again here..

A Muslim by law has the right to practice his religion in this country if it harms no one, which includes the right to reasonable accommodation at his work in order to perform his prayers, the right to refuse to handle pork and the right to refuse to sell alcohol, even if that place of business sells alcohol and pork products..

That is going to depend on the state and state law.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc
a reply to: Annee

Ah, so dodge everything.

Even that comment is off because I'm not the one advocating the government force people to do stuff, YOU are. I'm advocating leaving people alone to make their own choices.

You are trying to argue an idealism that might work on a small island for a short period.

It is not realistic in a population of over 3 million people.

But you make a claim without any support or evidence (and why 3 million? Just pull that number out if your butt?)
Your way is even less tenable in large populations because the larger the population, the less practible and successful arbitrary government mandates work.

USA 2014 318.9 million (Oops! I missed some zeros. Fixed it.). I rounded it off.

We are not a Democracy. Majority does not rule.

We are a secular government. Religion does not rule.

We are a Constitutional Republic that allows for everyone being treated equally.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: NavyDoc

No. I said people should be able to choose.

Ok. According to you people should be able to choose to discriminate. Right?

Like saying people should have the freedom of speech is not advocating what they are saying. You do believe in the freedom of speech, yes? You do often disagree with what some people say, correct? However you would still support their right to say it even if you disagreed with it, yes? Or do you hate free speech too?

That right there is a perfect example of a straw man argument. I have never said I hate free speech. What does free speech have to do with businesses selling products and services?

You do have difficulty with abstracts. Let's break it down.

You think that people should have the right to free speech.

Some people say some pretty crappy things.

Even though you disagree with what they say, you still think they should have the freedom to say it.

Thinking that they should be free to say it is not an advocation of what they say.


I think people should have the freedom of association.

Some people may do some crappy things like discriminate.

Even though I disagree with their crappy choices, they still should have that freedom.

Thinking they should be free to make their own decisions is not an endorsement of the decisions they make.

Simple enough for you?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc
a reply to: Annee

Ah, so dodge everything.

Even that comment is off because I'm not the one advocating the government force people to do stuff, YOU are. I'm advocating leaving people alone to make their own choices.

You are trying to argue an idealism that might work on a small island for a short period.

It is not realistic in a population of over 3 million people.

But you make a claim without any support or evidence (and why 3 million? Just pull that number out if your butt?)
Your way is even less tenable in large populations because the larger the population, the less practible and successful arbitrary government mandates work.

USA 2014 318.9 million (Oops! I missed some zeros). I rounded it off.

We are not a Democracy, Majority does not rule.

We are a secular government. Religions does not rule.

We are a Constitutional Republic that allows for everyone being treated equally.

Under the law by the government. True equality has nothing to do with the state forcing one person to serve another--we should have left that idea behind in 1865.

a reply to: NavyDoc

Why the heck do you keep bringing up the freedom of speech? What the heck does it have to do with the topic? The freedom of speech means you are free to say whatever you want! What does that have to do with businesses?

Again... by saying that the business owners have the right to discriminate means you support discrimination.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc
a reply to: Annee

Ah, so dodge everything.

Even that comment is off because I'm not the one advocating the government force people to do stuff, YOU are. I'm advocating leaving people alone to make their own choices.

You are trying to argue an idealism that might work on a small island for a short period.

It is not realistic in a population of over 3 million people.

But you make a claim without any support or evidence (and why 3 million? Just pull that number out if your butt?)
Your way is even less tenable in large populations because the larger the population, the less practible and successful arbitrary government mandates work.

USA 2014 318.9 million (Oops! I missed some zeros). I rounded it off.

We are not a Democracy, Majority does not rule.

We are a secular government. Religions does not rule.

We are a Constitutional Republic that allows for everyone being treated equally.

Under the law by the government. True equality has nothing to do with the state forcing one person to serve another--we should have left that idea behind in 1865.

No, we shouldn't.

I've watched the decline of dominance of Christianity since the 50's. They never should have had as much power as they did.

This current power struggle between religion and secular is a good thing. Religion will eventually lose - - and then there will be no issue in discrimination of LGBT.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: NavyDoc

Why the heck do you keep bringing up the freedom of speech? What the heck does it have to do with the topic? The freedom of speech means you are free to say whatever you want! What does that have to do with businesses?

Again... by saying that the business owners have the right to discriminate means you support discrimination.

Now you either are being intentionally obtuse or simply stupid. The conceptual concepts and principles are very obvious.

One can support someone else's right to do or say or think how they wish without advocating what they do or say or think.

Methinks you don't know what tolerance means.

a reply to: Annee

www.eeoc.gov...

it can be expanded through state laws, but this is federal law..

now, if the employer is an individual who owns a small company, they should not loose their individual right to say no, if need be, without harassment from customers, or non customers, as people are allowed such protections and freedom from actual harassment under the law..

I don't agree with the loss of ANYONE's rights under the law - regardless... the law doesn't say you have to agree with them.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc
a reply to: Annee

Ah, so dodge everything.

Even that comment is off because I'm not the one advocating the government force people to do stuff, YOU are. I'm advocating leaving people alone to make their own choices.

You are trying to argue an idealism that might work on a small island for a short period.

It is not realistic in a population of over 3 million people.

But you make a claim without any support or evidence (and why 3 million? Just pull that number out if your butt?)
Your way is even less tenable in large populations because the larger the population, the less practible and successful arbitrary government mandates work.

USA 2014 318.9 million (Oops! I missed some zeros). I rounded it off.

We are not a Democracy, Majority does not rule.

We are a secular government. Religions does not rule.

We are a Constitutional Republic that allows for everyone being treated equally.

Under the law by the government. True equality has nothing to do with the state forcing one person to serve another--we should have left that idea behind in 1865.

No, we shouldn't.

I've watched the decline of dominance of Christianity since the 50's. They never should have had as much power as they did.

This power struggle between religion and secular is a good thing. Religion will eventually lose - - and then there will be no issue in discrimination of LGBT.

So you are for forced servitude? The 1865 reference was about slavery and it seems you are cool with that?

"Power struggle against religion?" So that's your thing? Bigotry against religious people so bad you'd rather sacrifice things like individual liberty just to get back at them?

Wow. Well I guess we can see that fundies aren't the only hateful bigots in the room.

I don't like religious fanatics either but I guess my desire to see everyone free to do their own thing supersedes any desire for payback

a reply to: NavyDoc

Methinks you don't know what tolerance means.

Uh you don't know anything about me. I am deaf so obviously I know all about tolerance. I have many friends who are in the minority.

As a deaf person I should expect to get a good interpreter at the hospital in case of emergency. According to you they have the right to refuse me that.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: NavyDoc

Methinks you don't know what tolerance means.

Uh you don't know anything about me. I am deaf so obviously I know all about tolerance. I have many friends who are in the minority.

As a deaf person I should expect to get a good interpreter at the hospital in case of emergency. According to you they have the right to refuse me that.

Nonsense. A hospital is a taxpayer supported essential service.

So now, having failed at the straw man logical fallacy, you are going for reducto ad absurdum.

And being deaf does neither give you some sort or moral high ground, special insight, nor understanding of what tolerance is. Going for victim hood to try to win an arguement too I see. Classy.

And before you get all offended in righteous indignation, remember you brought it up as if it was some sort of checkmate. If you are going to argue a point, argue it on its merits in logical discourse and don't try to play the intimidation game.

a reply to: NavyDoc

Nonsense. A hospital is a taxpayer supported essential service.

How about private clinics? Better for you? You are dancing around it.

And being deaf does neither give you some sort or moral high ground, special insight, nor understanding of what tolerance is.

Sometimes I wonder if you are being a troll. Being deaf gives me experience with intolerance. People of difference races, disabilities, etc etc of course do experience intolerance.

Going for victim hood to try to win an arguement too I see. Classy.

Eh? How am I going for a victim hood? Ok I guess you are being a troll.