Refusing to Serve Gays, The difference between discrimination and forced Participation

I'm gonna start refusing service to Christians at my restaurant. They are disgusting and I don't agree with their lifestyles. I wish Christians would be more like normal humans. They can't though, due to their mental illness.

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: 5thNovember
Exactly how many other mechanics shops are there? More than enough to quit heir bitching. Store owners should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. Don't like it go somewhere else.

Exactly my thoughts.

I can not be forced to work for anyone I choose not to work for.

That is outlawed by the 14 th amendment.

Forcing one to serve another against their will is in fact slavery.

These douche bags can just go to another place.

No slavery is forced labor without compensation. Being forced to cater a gay wedding then the wedding party paying for it isn't slavery. There is compensation involved.

Compensation is not even involved in slavery.

It doesn't matter if they are or aren't compensated.

Some slaves were paid, how do you think they could buy their way out of slavery?

They were still slaves though, because it wasn't their choice who when or where the worked.

Slavery is taking ones right to decide who what where and when one must perform services for another.

Have you ever even read about slavery?

Do you even understand the concept?

Sure my work can tell me who where what or when to work.

But I can quit any time I decide I don't want to.

If the gov is given the right to order me to fix your car, I am enslaved by the law to do so, against my will.

That is in fact slavery.

That isn't the form of slavery outlawed by the 13th amendment. The slavery outlawed by that amendment involves ownership of another person. So you are still wrong. (Edit) It was also extended to include debt bondage.

a reply to: TsukiLunar

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: johnwick

Comparing civil rights to slavery?

Wow..

Problem I have with that logic is no one forced you to start the business where you would be serving the general public.

Slavery was a civil rights issue, duh!!!!!

Nice try?

a reply to: johnwick

Ya, the reason we need them!

Now you are trying to say that people calling for them are turning people into slaves.

Better luck next time?

originally posted by: TsukiLunar
I'm gonna start refusing service to Christians at my restaurant. They are disgusting and I don't agree with their lifestyles. I wish Christians would be more like normal humans. They can't though, due to their mental illness.

I support your right to do so!!!!!

Though I feel it might not be in your businesses best interest.

It is your property, and your right to run as badly as you want.

Good luck!

a reply to: johnwick

Thank you for the support. It might not seem like a good business strategy but I have already started a Kickstarter campaign online and over $1 million has been donated- seems I'm not the only one who thinks christians are disgusting and immoral "people". Really, it is their fault for being such disgusting beings. I won't be forced to work slave labor for those mass murderers and self-justifying bigots.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: 5thNovember
Exactly how many other mechanics shops are there? More than enough to quit heir bitching. Store owners should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. Don't like it go somewhere else.

Exactly my thoughts.

I can not be forced to work for anyone I choose not to work for.

That is outlawed by the 14 th amendment.

Forcing one to serve another against their will is in fact slavery.

These douche bags can just go to another place.

No slavery is forced labor without compensation. Being forced to cater a gay wedding then the wedding party paying for it isn't slavery. There is compensation involved.

Compensation is not even involved in slavery.

It doesn't matter if they are or aren't compensated.

Some slaves were paid, how do you think they could buy their way out of slavery?

They were still slaves though, because it wasn't their choice who when or where the worked.

Slavery is taking ones right to decide who what where and when one must perform services for another.

Have you ever even read about slavery?

Do you even understand the concept?

Sure my work can tell me who where what or when to work.

But I can quit any time I decide I don't want to.

If the gov is given the right to order me to fix your car, I am enslaved by the law to do so, against my will.

That is in fact slavery.

That isn't the form of slavery outlawed by the 13th amendment. The slavery outlawed by that amendment involves ownership of another person. So you are still wrong.

BTW I said 14th.

Reading comprehension is a worth while investment.

This issue has never been thoroughly thought out I don't think.

If we allow the gov this right.

What is to stop them from say, telling you that you have to work for McDonalds?

Or Walmart?

Or the same bigots you hate so much?

You only agree now because of your political views.

You have to look at these things from all sides.

I think gays should be able to deny straights services if they want.

It is their right to decide who they do work for.

I don't see the big misunderstanding.

The gov does not have the right to force people to work for others.

Nobody does.

Slavery is outlawed.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: johnwick

Ya, the reason we need them!

Now you are trying to say that people calling for them are turning people into slaves.

Better luck next time?

It is not a civil right that you can force me to do work for you.

It is my civil right to do work only when I want where I want and for who I want.

Getting your car fixed at my shop is not a right you possess.

Forcing me to fix your car, is taking my right to choose who where or when I work away.

There are other shops, it is your right to go to any of the others you choose.

You aren't trying to give rights, you are advocating taking them away.

a reply to: johnwick

So by this logic, we have been victims of slavery since the first civil rights act was passed?

This is some twisted logic to say the least.

Should chill with the slippery slopes

Great distinction, OP.

I don't have an issue with a person not wanting to participate in a 'gay event', but when it comes to straight up denial of service for a lifestyle then I think that is wrong since no one is asking you to participate in that lifestyle. I should note that I think it is foolish to not treat our fellow human beings with respect as long as we are given the same in return.

While I am not religious myself it seems to me that any religion worth joining would show love and respect for all of humanity. I don't blame the Christian religion for 'gay hating' just a small percentage that don't understand the real message of Jesus was love.

originally posted by: TsukiLunar
a reply to: johnwick

Thank you for the support. It might not seem like a good business strategy but I have already started a Kickstarter campaign online and over $1 million has been donated- seems I'm not the only one who thinks christians are disgusting and immoral "people". Really, it is their fault for being such disgusting beings. I won't be forced to work slave labor for those mass murderers and self-justifying bigots.

I don't share your hatred of Christians, but I do share your love of freedom.

Wow $1 million should get you started off pretty well with at least a couple of locations.

What kind of food do you plan on serving?

I love to eat.

a reply to: johnwick

I am probably gonna serve gay food that instantly turns the eater into a homosexual.

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: johnwick

Ya, the reason we need them!

Now you are trying to say that people calling for them are turning people into slaves.

Better luck next time?

It is not a civil right that you can force me to do work for you.

It is my civil right to do work only when I want where I want and for who I want.

Getting your car fixed at my shop is not a right you possess.

Forcing me to fix your car, is taking my right to choose who where or when I work away.

There are other shops, it is your right to go to any of the others you choose.

You aren't trying to give rights, you are advocating taking them away.

Oh please, it is entirely a civil right to not be refused service based on their persons alone and not their actions in your place of business.

You don't have the right to be a dick, which is the only right that would be taken away there.

The bible on slavery

So which is it? Is slavery good or bad? Careful, better not carry an opinion that conflicts with the almighty.

originally posted by: johnwick
BTW I said 14th.

Reading comprehension is a worth while investment.

I know what you said. I even originally typed the 14th but realized that had to be wrong and changed it to the 13th. I had HOPED that you made a typo by saying the 14th Amendment since the 13th is the one that abolished slavery. The 14th amendment has nothing to do with slavery. I wasn't trying to be a grammar nazi or anything so I didn't say anything; but hey if you want to insist you said the 14th on purpose, it's your foot and you are more than entitled to stick in your mouth.

This issue has never been thoroughly thought out I don't think.

If we allow the gov this right.

What is to stop them from say, telling you that you have to work for McDonalds?

Or Walmart?

Or the same bigots you hate so much?

That isn't the same thing. We are talking about a person who opens a business for the EXPRESS purpose of catering weddings. That is their livelihood. The government didn't dictate that they open that business. They did of their own free will. The government just wants you to serve all patrons equally.

You only agree now because of your political views.

You have to look at these things from all sides.

I think gays should be able to deny straights services if they want.

It is their right to decide who they do work for.

No. That's illegal and discriminatory.

I don't see the big misunderstanding.

The gov does not have the right to force people to work for others.

Nobody does.

Slavery is outlawed.

That's because you are putting the slavery label on something that isn't slavery.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

They changed the definition off slavery in order to better paint themselves as the wronged party.

Slavery is a legal or economic system under which people are treated as property.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: johnwick

So by this logic, we have been victims of slavery since the first civil rights act was passed?

This is some twisted logic to say the least.

Should chill with the slippery slopes

I don't see how we have been slaves since then.

I don't think my logic is twisted at all.

I think yours is.

You are advocating state sponsored slavery.

Think of it this way.

Being g gay is not even a federally protected status like being a vet or old or disabled.

But companies discriminate against people all the time.

Just for example until the ACA passed, insurances companies discriminated against the disabled every day.

Because it isn't a right to get their services.

So even though being disabled was a federally protected status, it was still perfectly legal to discriminate against them simply because they were disabled.

It is not a right to obtain the services of another.

The person providing the service does so only at a time and place they choose to.

You want the gov to be able to force people to perform services against their will.

That is slavery.

a reply to: johnwick

That forced people to serve people they didn't want, wasn't that your definition of slavery?


You contradict your self at the end of your post, the first civil rights act was the gov forcing people to preform services against their will...

Just for example until the ACA passed, insurances companies discriminated against the disabled every day.

Not sure how this helps your case, people hated this fact and it was one of the few things praised in the ACA by both sides.

originally posted by: Sremmos80

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: johnwick

Ya, the reason we need them!

Now you are trying to say that people calling for them are turning people into slaves.

Better luck next time?

It is not a civil right that you can force me to do work for you.

It is my civil right to do work only when I want where I want and for who I want.

Getting your car fixed at my shop is not a right you possess.

Forcing me to fix your car, is taking my right to choose who where or when I work away.

There are other shops, it is your right to go to any of the others you choose.

You aren't trying to give rights, you are advocating taking them away.

Oh please, it is entirely a civil right to not be refused service based on their persons alone and not their actions in your place of business.

You don't have the right to be a dick, which is the only right that would be taken away there.

Um yes, you do have a right to be a dick.

It is not your right for everyone to be nice to you.

It is my right to walk around as the biggest dick in history all day every day every where I go if I choose.

Not wise IMHO, but it is a right one does in fact possess.

You are truly an authoritarian.

You just seem to think you can just dictate what rights others possess at your whim.

What would you think if I just started telling you what rights you do or don't have?

It might seem good from the position of the one deciding, but not to those it is being decided for.