Gay marriage and business problem

a reply to: Informer1958

As far as Gay's suing Christian business, it's just an excuse to scam these business to make money for themselves.

you know this first hand, or is this an accusation?

Discrimination is wrong, you can't want to open a Public service and than deny someone based on their Sexuality,Gender,Race

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
a reply to: grandmakdw

What the churches are
is afraid
afraid of being sued
afraid of being dragged into being a pubic spectacle
afraid of death threats towards it members and toward the minister
and I think the fear is justified
based on what the people who have been sued by LGBT
have endured so far

you essentially described most of the GLBTQ+ community

So is revenge sweet?

Or should we all get beyond revenge that only creates more division, more hard feelings, more hatred?

Do two wrongs make a right?

Or is revenge so enticing that making relations worse is worth the revenge?

Churches are simply preparing for the reality
that the LGBT community will be exacting
revenge on them by suing them and thus
attempting to destroy the congregation and pastor.

Again: I don't care if gays marry. I believe in live and let live.

I'm just calling it as I see it, with the truth of reality.

a reply to: grandmakdw

Why do you think we want revenge???

I keep asking this question; It keeps getting ignored!

Do you think we're as petty as some of your less charitable brothers and sisters who not only want to keep us second class citizens, but are glad to return to the days when homosexual behavior was illegal and punishable by death?

Marriage equality existed in 27 states before Obergefell for years and there has not been one episode of gays storming your churches ...

So I'm beginning to think this supposed "fear" is nothing more than an excuse.

a reply to: grandmakdw

No i don't think we want revenge, or two wrongs make a right etc. i was just pointing out the fact that you essentially described the GLBTQ+ community

you are willing to defend one

originally posted by: raedar
Don't businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone?

Honest question I have wondered about.

No, they don't. In the US refusing service based upon individual characteristics is illegal for a public business. You can write policies that refuse service to groups of people such as dress codes (no sandals, must wear a shirt, etc), not alienating other customers (causing a big scene in a store), or many other activities and classifications. However it must be based upon some general criteria and that criteria can't be one of a handful of protected groups (race, gender, etc)

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
a reply to: Ceeker63

I don't think churches can be sued for not performing a gay marriage. Not even now with the new laws can churches be compelled to provide this . That's against the constitution's freedom of religion clauses. The justice of the peace must but the Catholic priest cannot be made to do this.

Churches can't be sued, they are under no obligation to accept marriages from anyone they don't want to accept. By their very nature a Christian church already doesn't recognize a Muslim marriage so it has nothing to do with homosexuality.

The ruling was purely that state issued marriage certificates cannot be handed out in a discriminatory fashion. This is because there are state offered benefits, and as a result under the 14th amendment it's illegal to deny those benefits to a portion of the population.

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Hypothetical a man who is obviously a man but chooses to dress as a woman and goes to a formal establishment that requires gentlemen to wear ties. Can they refuse him?

There was a case over this a few years ago actually. I forget the results and a quick Google search isn't finding it. I think the ruling was that a man can be refused service for wearing a dress, but if the man identifies as a woman and could show that was the case it was ok. Of course that ruling means giving the restaurant your medical history which people don't want to do. There was the case here on ATS recently with a girl attempting to wear a tux to her prom arguing that it was more appropriate for her since she feels like a guy. I'm not sure if that one has worked it's way through the courts but is a similar situation.

Late to the party with this one, but;

If you don't want to get sued, don't discriminate.

Simple really.

Furthermore, Jesus has quite clear instructions for Christians on the matters of money (and business)

14 They came to him and said, “Teacher, we know that you are a man of integrity. You aren’t swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are; but you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not? 15 Should we pay or shouldn’t we?”

But Jesus knew their hypocrisy. “Why are you trying to trap me?” he asked. “Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.” 16 They brought the coin, and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?”

“Caesar’s,” they replied.

17 Then Jesus said to them, “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.”

Literally translated; Money is of no interest to God therefore trading services for it is of no interest to him either.

In other words discriminating service is UNCHRISTIAN

It's no different than a bakery not wanting to make a cake for an inter-racial couple, because it 'offends' their beliefs on racial purity.

Equally asinine, equally ridiculous.

If you don't want to get sued for breaking the law, then don't break the law. Besides, it's not like they didn't know this would happen. The USA is the capital of frivolous law suits.

~Tenth

originally posted by: SPECULUM
The government Squandering our tax money for special interest groups, to create more laws and situations on folks that just want to be left the hell alone.

Special interest groups?
You mean citizens of your country?

You have a significant problem if you think people different to you are "special interest groups", rather than just citizens deserving the same representation in their government. These are people who deserve the same rights and freedoms you have, and you seem to think you're in a position to dictate what rights other American citizens should have because your a "white, Christian, heterosexual".

You are no more of a citizen and no more deserving of representation than any other American.

And FYI, all those pesky gays you hate so much also contribute to the economy and pay taxes JUST LIKE YOU.

originally posted by: grandmakdw
Churches are simply preparing for the reality
that the LGBT community will be exacting
revenge on them by suing them and thus
attempting to destroy the congregation and pastor.

And you conveniently ignore the fact that this has not happened, when same sex marriage has been legal in several countries for years, and several US states too.

So, tell me, where are all these roaming gangs of scary LGBT people ready to storm your churches with their demands to be married?

It's not happening, stop deluding yourself and buying into the right wing propaganda.

originally posted by: grandmakdw
Churches are simply preparing for the reality
that the LGBT community will be exacting
revenge on them by suing them and thus
attempting to destroy the congregation and pastor.

It's interesting really. Christians spent SOOO long denying gay people the right to get married that once it ends up happening they have to immediately manufacture another threat based on the fact that they recognize that they've pissed these people off for so long. Yet instead of realizing the irony in this they double down on the fear factor so they can continue to pretend like the "gays" are the bad guys.

The cases I know of were deliberately targeted for the purpose of drama and suing.

My answer to it is that companies have the right to have an ethics code and a disclaimer that says they will adhere to their ethical code when wording / decorating cakes etc and that is at their discretion and their right.

For example:

''We are a Christian bakery and we reserve the right to refuse any material deemed offensive.''

or

''We reserve the right to refuse any customisation on any grounds''.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: grandmakdw

Why do you think we want revenge???

I keep asking this question; It keeps getting ignored!

Do you think we're as petty as some of your less charitable brothers and sisters who not only want to keep us second class citizens, but are glad to return to the days when homosexual behavior was illegal and punishable by death?

Marriage equality existed in 27 states before Obergefell for years and there has not been one episode of gays storming your churches ...

So I'm beginning to think this supposed "fear" is nothing more than an excuse.

When LGBT takes someone to court for discrimination
or declares someone a homophobic in the press
the awful hate begins
the hate mail
the hate email
the death threats
to the point that businesses have had to close

The actions from the "fringe" in the LGBT
community that have come each and
every time following a lawsuit
is frightening and demonstrates
a deep need for revenge.

The actions following the lawsuits
are a form of revenge
and to those of us not in the
community, it looks an awful
lot like revenge.

a reply to: grandmakdw

And that's no different than what the anti-abortion crowd, the pro segregation crowd and the anti LGBT crowd have been doing for decades.

I don't support frivolous law suits, but they aren't any different than the ones organizations that you would support have filed over the years.

~Tenth

a reply to: tothetenthpower

Exactly. And not to mention, none of that means that there is a legal basis or even a rational basis to believe that gays will come into churches and force the churches to marry them.

a reply to: Aazadan

Churches if they rent out their church, which is not a religious activity, to anyone, it is like being a business. Therefore, in order not to be sued churches can no longer rent out their facility to anyone. Because renting the facility to someone not in the active congregation (except to other religious congregations) can be seen as a business activity, subject to non-discrimination laws.

My daughter paid the absolutely stunningly beautiful very old little church she married in $1500 for use of the church, and was required to pay the pastor and have him present $100 and pay the organist and have her present $150 and a wedding planner for the church was required to be present and involved for the $1500 fee.

Therefore, our church and many others have decided to cease renting out their churches to non-members. It wasn't exactly renting, as there was a fee for non-members to use the church, but it could be argued that the fee is the same as renting and therefore subject to being required to allow anyone to pay the fee and use the church.

Because of that lawyers have advised churches to cease "renting" out their facilities entirely to avoid being sued.

I have to say this again for people new to the thread:
I do not oppose gay marriage, my philosophy is live and let live
and the lens through which I assess others.

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: grandmakdw

And that's no different than what the anti-abortion crowd, the pro segregation crowd and the anti LGBT crowd have been doing for decades.

I don't support frivolous law suits, but they aren't any different than the ones organizations that you would support have filed over the years.

~Tenth

You are correct in that many people have engaged in this behavior.

Doesn't make it right, doesn't make it honorable

Revenge is sweet when heaped on others
but is like heaping coals
it burns everyone upon whom a coal or an ash fall
Leaving behind a trail of burned and angry people
who then hate
A vicious and ugly cycle

If you noticed,
my extreme derision
was toward
those who subsequently
sent hate emails
sent death threats
who caused deep fear in
others, only for the express
purpose of revenge and creating more hate.

The lawsuits themselves cause fear, (in all cases regardless of it is over a property line or discrimination)

However, the subsequent terrorizing of the families and businesses is revenge

and is so beyond the civil behavior and respect
that the very people sending the hate mail and death threats
are demanding for themselves,
that they can not expect
respect in return.
And this behavior leads to ugly generalizations
regarding "the other side" whomever the
other side is.

An ugly cycle, that it appears no one is willing to break.

a reply to: grandmakdw

Ain't that the truth.

~Tenth

a reply to: grandmakdw

You are subtly implying that all LGBT folks are involved in the hate mail, death threats, etc.

Your first statement is utterly overgeneralized and fallacious. Which LGBT, which cases, give an instance of someone being "declared" homophobic in the press (and are you sure it is always LGBT that do this?)

Do you think the hate mail and death threats are only "one way" ... sure you do, because in your agenda, only Christians are victimized.

Your quotation marks around the word fringe make it clear that you don't really think it's only a few extremists in our community, as the extremists in your Christian community that regularly call for the execution of gay people, which you're always so quick to defend with "Yeah, but that's not all Christians; how unfair of you to categorize all of us the same way." (paraphrase)

As evidence, I present these comments that you made on this site recently:

originally posted by: grandmakdw

When you write Christians and follow it with their awfulness

Remember you are by default referring to ALL Christians:

*snip big list of beloved but famous Christians*

So if you consider all of the above to be awful people, then and only then are you are consistent in your assertions.

What happens to businesses after they publicly announce that they are discriminatory is the function of the free market. People stop placing orders and patronizing the stores. People don't want to do business or be seen doing business with bigots, as a general rule.

Bah. You're only propagating the same vague propaganda you always do.

So, marriage equality has existed in an ever-growing number of States since 2004.

In 11 years, can you point out a case where a same-sex couple demanded to be married in an actual religious institution, or sued for the right to do so, or sued to take vengeance on the religious institution?

If not, would you admit that you're merely perpetuating a fear-mongering campaign that has no basis in fact?

You know, the truthful honorable thing to do?

TO summarize:

No civil suits with huge damage payouts have been filed or won by LGBT American citizens, thus making the premise of the OP that "gays are only bringing suit for money" utterly fallacious.

Marriage equality was the rule in 27 US states before Obergefell, for over ten years on some States, and no where, not one time has a religious institution been required to perform any wedding it chooses not to and neither have any suits or charges been brought to that effect.

In speaking of "revenge" the only revenge I see as a fallout from Obergefell is that some straight, white, Christian legislators are willing to DESTROY marriage themselves rather than allow equality.

If that's not the essence of irony, I don't know what is.