06-30-2014 01:17 AM
1,813 ... 6061626364 ...
tools
  1. anon8126715's Avatar
    The more the fringe republicans push for these far right bigoted laws, the more it turns voters off. I'm perfectly fine with the idiocy of the GOP coming in loud and clear. The only problem I have is I wish there was a legitimate liberal party to vote for. The Democrats don't seem to have the balls to vote for true middle class issues, save a few like Elizabeth Warren, and the libertarians still come across to me as a wolf in sheep's clothing (i.e. republican lite).
    msndrstood and GadgetGator like this.
    02-23-2014 12:07 AM
  2. Mooncatt's Avatar
    I just don't understand how people still think like this. The right to discriminate goes against everything our constitution stands for. I know our constitution does not explicitly state gay, LGBT, etc but I thought it guarantees everyone equal protection against the law.
    It also guarantees the right to be close minded, more or less. Don't businesses already reserve the right to refuse service to anyone? I do know that there was a recent news story about a wedding photographer refusing to tend a gay wedding due to religious reasons. I think that one went to court, but I didn't really follow it. This bill may be a result of that story. In either case, whatever happened to simply going to another business? Taking that wedding photographer case, that couple should have just went to another one willing to serve them instead of forcing that one specific photographer to do so.

    I don't think anything like this bill is needed, and I do support businesses having the right to refuse service for whatever reason. Even if that reason is because you wore white with pink polka dot shoes. We as consumers have the right to not go to such a business.
    nolittdroid likes this.
    02-23-2014 12:21 AM
  3. Timelessblur's Avatar
    It also guarantees the right to be close minded, more or less. Don't businesses already reserve the right to refuse service to anyone? I do know that there was a recent news story about a wedding photographer refusing to tend a gay wedding due to religious reasons. I think that one went to court, but I didn't really follow it. This bill may be a result of that story. In either case, whatever happened to simply going to another business? Taking that wedding photographer case, that couple should have just went to another one willing to serve them instead of forcing that one specific photographer to do so.

    I don't think anything like this bill is needed, and I do support businesses having the right to refuse service for whatever reason. Even if that reason is because you wore white with pink polka dot shoes. We as consumers have the right to not go to such a business.
    No business do not have the right to refuse services under discrimination reason.
    For example if a business refused service to someone because they are a minority (racism) they can, and should be sued into bankruptcy. We do not need those and legally they are not allowed to do that.
    Now their are valid reason for refusing services but racism and bigotry is not one of them.
    You can not refuse service to someone just because they are muslim as that is not a valid or legal one. If you do that you are allowed and should be sued into bankruptcy.

    AKA this is a jim crow law. Supporting this law is like saying you support racism. Top it off this is what the GOP is.
    02-23-2014 12:38 AM
  4. toober's Avatar
    What if a muslim owned a pet grooming business and I wanted my pet pig groomed? Should I be able to sue them to bankruptcy?
    02-23-2014 01:00 AM
  5. Tall Mike 2145's Avatar
    The first question I have is how "for" this law are the people of Arizona themselves? If they aren't, then obviously there is a problem with the Arizona GOP which needs to be dealt with. On the other hand, if this truly how Arizona Republicans feel, then this becomes a horse (or elephant, if you prefer) of a different color. There's little point in saying the Arizona state legislature needs to be stopped if the people of that state are the problem.

    The GOP is eating itself. Their destruction (should it come to pass) will be the just reward for their radicalization which can probably be traced back a lot further than merely the Tea Party or even the Christian Coalition.
    GadgetGator likes this.
    02-23-2014 08:15 AM
  6. nolittdroid's Avatar
    It also guarantees the right to be close minded, more or less. Don't businesses already reserve the right to refuse service to anyone? I do know that there was a recent news story about a wedding photographer refusing to tend a gay wedding due to religious reasons. I think that one went to court, but I didn't really follow it. This bill may be a result of that story. In either case, whatever happened to simply going to another business? Taking that wedding photographer case, that couple should have just went to another one willing to serve them instead of forcing that one specific photographer to do so.

    I don't think anything like this bill is needed, and I do support businesses having the right to refuse service for whatever reason. Even if that reason is because you wore white with pink polka dot shoes. We as consumers have the right to not go to such a business.
    I agree, a small business owner should have the right to refuse service but turning away business is bad for your bottom line. Isnt it in your best interest to serve everyone who is law abiding, and drama free in a world where most small businesses fail after 5 years?

    Additionally this is not very "small business" of Arizona. What was the point of the bill? Were a bunch of bigoted Arizonians overrun with gay and lesbians customers one day? Or are they trying for a new discrimination tactic since their illegal immigration bills have failed?

    At the end of the day, all this does is alienate voters from the GOP and the exact opposite of what they need to do.

    SG3/iPad2/OG NookColor
    GadgetGator likes this.
    02-23-2014 10:31 AM
  7. nolittdroid's Avatar
    What if a muslim owned a pet grooming business and I wanted my pet pig groomed? Should I be able to sue them to bankruptcy?
    I don't follow that example. Are you implying if a Muslim doesn't groom pigs that you should sue them?

    Good luck finding a pig groomer, my dog groomer doesnt even take cats!

    SG3/iPad2/OG NookColor
    02-23-2014 10:34 AM
  8. toober's Avatar
    Maybe you should sue you dog groomer for not taking cats then. My question was whether or not a person could deny services based on their religious beliefs. Muslims believe that swine are unclean and while they are only forbidden from touching or eating the dead flesh of the animal, most will have nothing to do with live ones either. So, if a muslim were to open a pet grooming business, and I were to show up demanding the grooming of my pot-bellied pig, could they deny me service based on their religious beliefs? Are we going to say "that's not fair" and "the government should shut him down", or do we just save that stuff when it christians turning away gays and women wanting birth control?
    02-23-2014 10:47 AM
  9. NoYankees44's Avatar
    This is a slippery slope either direction. Either you say that businesses can refuse anyone for any reason, or you force businesses to serve everyone that walks in their door no matter what. Anything in between is an unenforceable gray area that simply will not work.

    If you allow businesses to refuse people, you get possible discrimination.

    If you force businesses to server everyone. It is impossible to have dress codes, deny rude(ect.) people, kick people out of a store for anything short of breaking the law, or deny people based on any reason. This has lots of consequences i am sure i am not even considering.


    Something to consider is casinos' policies. In a casino, you can be denied service and escorted off the property for any reason at any time. The reason they have these policies is because their business is maintain by winning more that loosing. If you win too much too consistently, even if you are not caught cheating, a casino can and will ask you to leave. In extreme cases they will even add you to a black list. Now this does not happen very often of course, because if no one wins people stop gambling, but it does happen.
    02-23-2014 11:03 AM
  10. anon8126715's Avatar
    You can't help wonder if these bigots are coming out of the wood works because they believe that we are at the end of days and they think that these "sins" need to be called out. If there's even a slight chance that the end of days is near, i'm not sure why someone that claims to be religious would want to go out with hate in their heart. Maybe that's what religions mean when they say that not everyone that practices their religion's tenets will get past the pearly gates. Would be kind of ironic wouldn't it?

    If I were the Pearly Gates administrator, I'd have that Simpsons character at the Pearly Gates around so that whenever an overzealous religious person came to the gate but was denied because they were hateful, he would point and "HAHA" them.
    DOMA and Prop 8 fall-fkx0ytkfb7fyd1u.medium.gif


    I don't see much difference in their misguided agenda compared to that of the 9/11 terrorists that thought they were doing "good" in the name of their religion.
    msndrstood and nolittdroid like this.
    02-23-2014 11:33 AM
  11. nolittdroid's Avatar
    Maybe you should sue you dog groomer for not taking cats then. My question was whether or not a person could deny services based on their religious beliefs. Muslims believe that swine are unclean and while they are only forbidden from touching or eating the dead flesh of the animal, most will have nothing to do with live ones either. So, if a muslim were to open a pet grooming business, and I were to show up demanding the grooming of my pot-bellied pig, could they deny me service based on their religious beliefs? Are we going to say "that's not fair" and "the government should shut him down", or do we just save that stuff when it christians turning away gays and women wanting birth control?
    I can't honestly speak because I am neither religious nor Muslim nor a 'pet groomer' but I would imagine the pig owner would be turned away simply because many groomers do not take pigs, only cats and dogs.

    SG3/iPad2/OG NookColor
    02-23-2014 11:39 AM
  12. Timelessblur's Avatar
    This is a slippery slope either direction. Either you say that businesses can refuse anyone for any reason, or you force businesses to serve everyone that walks in their door no matter what. Anything in between is an unenforceable gray area that simply will not work.

    If you allow businesses to refuse people, you get possible discrimination.

    If you force businesses to server everyone. It is impossible to have dress codes, deny rude(ect.) people, kick people out of a store for anything short of breaking the law, or deny people based on any reason. This has lots of consequences i am sure i am not even considering.


    Something to consider is casinos' policies. In a casino, you can be denied service and escorted off the property for any reason at any time. The reason they have these policies is because their business is maintain by winning more that loosing. If you win too much too consistently, even if you are not caught cheating, a casino can and will ask you to leave. In extreme cases they will even add you to a black list. Now this does not happen very often of course, because if no one wins people stop gambling, but it does happen.
    No they define a line and it is pretty set. You can not discriminate based on race, sex, religion or sexaul orntation. Basicly it is the same crap the government can not discriminate on. That is a pretty clear line.

    Dress code is a fine thing to say you have X standard. But you can not say sorry you are gay not allowed to come in here.
    02-23-2014 01:38 PM
  13. Mooncatt's Avatar
    What if a muslim owned a pet grooming business and I wanted my pet pig groomed? Should I be able to sue them to bankruptcy?
    For a more real world example, I was buying alcohol with my groceries a while back and the line I got in had what I think was a Muslim cashier (I honestly don't know for sure, but it's not too pertinent to my point what religion it was). Her religion didn't allow her to handle alcohol, so she called over the front end manager, who rung it up and finished the sale. No fuss, no muss, no need to throw a fit or sue. Someone else with a chip on their shoulder could have handled things much worse. Should I have the right to sue because that cashier was "pushing her religious beliefs on me" by not serving me? Of course not.

    I agree, a small business owner should have the right to refuse service but turning away business is bad for your bottom line. Isnt it in your best interest to serve everyone who is law abiding, and drama free in a world where most small businesses fail after 5 years?
    I agree with everything you said. If a business owner, though, decides to discriminate against anyone, his business should live or die by those choices.
    nolittdroid likes this.
    02-23-2014 01:51 PM
  14. toober's Avatar
    For a more real world example, I was buying alcohol with my groceries a while back and the line I got in had what I think was a Muslim cashier (I honestly don't know for sure, but it's not too pertinent to my point what religion it was). Her religion didn't allow her to handle alcohol, so she called over the front end manager, who rung it up and finished the sale. No fuss, no muss, no need to throw a fit or sue. Someone else with a chip on their shoulder could have handled things much worse. Should I have the right to sue because that cashier was "pushing her religious beliefs on me" by not serving me? Of course not.
    I see nothing wrong with that. You were served with little to no inconvenience. This also raises other questions with me. If there were no other cashiers available, would you have been able to purchase your products? How much of an inconvenience will this be for other employees and does the employer then have the right to fire that employee for allowing her religious beliefs to hinder her performance?

    I agree with everything you said. If a business owner, though, decides to discriminate against anyone, his business should live or die by those choices.
    This has been my point all along. Let the business fail. It shouldn't take too long for the owner to figure out why he's going broke and either fix the problem or close the doors.
    02-23-2014 02:04 PM
  15. GadgetGator's Avatar
    It also guarantees the right to be close minded, more or less. Don't businesses already reserve the right to refuse service to anyone? I do know that there was a recent news story about a wedding photographer refusing to tend a gay wedding due to religious reasons. I think that one went to court, but I didn't really follow it. This bill may be a result of that story. In either case, whatever happened to simply going to another business?
    That might work in a wedding photographer situation, but what if it is a hotel owner and it's the only hotel for a hundred miles?

    The way I look at it, is no one said to black people, "Hey...just eat at a different restaurant" when they protested separate lunch counters. I see no difference here. Gay people are always told to just live with the discrimination or just adapt and work around it. No. We shouldn't have to do that anymore than anyone else. A business is not a church.

    The backers of this bill are so disingenuous. It is nothing more then anti-gay animus, specific to the gay marriage issue. I've seen a lot of TV interviews the last few days, and when issues such as restaurants are brought up they say..oh no no no. This doesn't cover that. Well, why not? Why is a florist or photographer's religious beliefs protected and another business owner's is not?
    02-23-2014 02:47 PM
  16. toober's Avatar
    That might work in a wedding photographer situation, but what if it is a hotel owner and it's the only hotel for a hundred miles?

    The way I look at it, is no one said to black people, "Hey...just eat at a different restaurant" when they protested separate lunch counters. I see no difference here. Gay people are always told to just live with the discrimination or just adapt and work around it. No. We shouldn't have to do that anymore than anyone else. A business is not a church.

    The backers of this bill are so disingenuous. It is nothing more then anti-gay animus, specific to the gay marriage issue. I've seen a lot of TV interviews the last few days, and when issues such as restaurants are brought up they say..oh no no no. This doesn't cover that. Well, why not? Why is a florist or photographer's religious beliefs protected and another business owner's is not?
    In the case of a florist, photographer, caterer, or wedding planner, they may think that their participation in an event would look like an endorsement of the lifestyle.

    It also turns my stomach every time I hear someone compare the treatment of gays to the way black people were treated in the past. This group was, for several hundred years, being looked upon as less than people. They wee considered property to be bought and sold and worked as if they were farm machinery. They were whipped and beaten, sometimes killed, for nothing more than the color of their skin. It was a very long, difficult fight for them to gain the rights that others were born with. To degrade their fight by comparing it to your challenges in finding a gay friendly caterer is appalling.

    As far as restaurants, stores, and hotels, how do they even know the people they are serving are gay? There are a lot of PDAs I don't want to see in public from straight people.
    02-23-2014 03:25 PM
  17. Live2ride883's Avatar
    So simply because someone disagrees with another person, that makes them a bigot or an id10t???

    Personally if a business doesn't want my money for any reason I'll gladly take it somewhere else...
    02-23-2014 04:25 PM
  18. Timelessblur's Avatar
    So simply because someone disagrees with another person, that makes them a bigot or an id10t???

    Personally if a business doesn't want my money for any reason I'll gladly take it somewhere else...
    This is not just a disagreement thing.
    This is discrimination. This is allowing people to treat gays as less than human.
    What would you say to a business allowed to say sorry you are black we do not serve your kind.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
    02-23-2014 06:23 PM
  19. GadgetGator's Avatar
    In the case of a florist, photographer, caterer, or wedding planner, they may think that their participation in an event would look like an endorsement of the lifestyle.
    How is renting them a room for the honeymoon any different???? Or booking a restaurant for the reception???? Or buying or renting your tux or dress from a store????

    It also turns my stomach every time I hear someone compare the treatment of gays to the way black people were treated in the past. This group was, for several hundred years, being looked upon as less than people.
    Ignorance of the matter has the same effect on me. Do you not think that gay people have been looked upon as less than people? Do you think that we have not been beaten and killed for who we are?

    To degrade their fight by comparing it to your challenges in finding a gay friendly caterer is appalling.
    I compared lack of service in a restaurant. By the way, do you have ANY idea, any at all, that many black people themselves compare gay civil rights to their own struggle? By your comments you don't, which is, to use your words, appalling.
    nolittdroid likes this.
    02-23-2014 07:07 PM
  20. toober's Avatar
    Comparing Black Civil Rights to Gay Civil Rights
    The cover of the Dec. 16, 2008, issue of The Advocate, the flagship gay publication, proclaimed boldly, “Gay Is the New Black,” stating that this is “The Last Great Civil Rights Struggle.” But whenever I mention this topic on my national talk radio show, asking my listeners if they believe it is fair to equate the black civil rights movement with today’s gay rights movement, I am flooded with African-American callers who take strong exception to this comparison.
    This is just the first link from a simple google search. I'm sure there are quite a few more, but it does seem that a number of black people may be offended by the comparison.

    In my daily life, I do my best to treat everyone equally. I treat the poor family in the run down trailer the same as the rich guy in the mansion on the hill (and I frequently deal with both on a daily basis, often in back to back appointments). I do not let my personal views come into play at all when I am on the clock and feel I should be fired on the spot if I ever do. I treat the racist the same as I treat the interracial couple. I treat the gay couple(assuming I have some reason to find out their preference) the same as I do the straight. If someone does decide to treat me differently because of my skin color, length of my hair, or any other reason, that is their problem, not mine. If I am told that a store will not serve me, I leave and find one that will. I will not lose days, weeks, or months of my life forcing someone to serve me. There is not enough time for me to worry about that kind of stuff.
    02-23-2014 08:17 PM
  21. Live2ride883's Avatar
    This is not just a disagreement thing.
    This is discrimination. This is allowing people to treat gays as less than human.
    What would you say to a business allowed to say sorry you are black we do not serve your kind.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
    I'm fairly sure that the store owners see it as them being allowed to exercise their religious freedom.

    Use your wallet to support the stores you want to shop at, if certain stores don't want homosexuals in them then go to places that do....
    02-23-2014 08:27 PM
  22. Timelessblur's Avatar
    I'm fairly sure that the store owners see it as them being allowed to exercise their religious freedom.

    Use your wallet to support the stores you want to shop at, if certain stores don't want homosexuals in them then go to places that do....
    Again same answer. You did not change the fact they are still bigots and idiots.
    Their religion said "sorry you are black we do not serve your kind. "

    You never answered the question.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
    02-23-2014 08:33 PM
  23. GadgetGator's Avatar
    Comparing Black Civil Rights to Gay Civil Rights
    This is just the first link from a simple google search. I'm sure there are quite a few more, but it does seem that a number of black people may be offended by the comparison.
    You didn't answer my questions. Do you think that no person has been killed for being gay? Or beaten? Or fired from a job? Or not allowed to marry? Or refused service at a restaurant? All things done to both blacks AND gays. Are the struggles exactly the same? No, no group's is. But the number of similarities far outweigh the number of differences. But more to the point, it's not a contest. Do I think women have had less of a struggle because I know of no woman who was tied to a fence and left for dead because she wanted to vote or have equal pay? No. So for you to put it into some sort of ranking or pecking order or to dismiss me and my concerns is rather ridiculous. Everyone should be treated equally, no matter their group. The dismissal that my rights are not a civil rights issue was the EXACT kind of thing I mentioned earlier...."just accept it", "Just live with it", "Just go somewhere else". Why should I have to? What is it about my rights that you don't view in the same regard? I would like to know.

    If someone does decide to treat me differently because of my skin color, length of my hair, or any other reason, that is their problem, not mine. If I am told that a store will not serve me, I leave and find one that will. I will not lose days, weeks, or months of my life forcing someone to serve me. There is not enough time for me to worry about that kind of stuff.
    Good thing everyone doesn't think that way or else nothing would ever change. Thanks goodness for the likes of MLK, Rosa Parks, Harvey Milk and more recently Edith Windsor who weren't okay with just not worrying about things. They DID worry. And they made a fuss. And change happened because of it.
    02-23-2014 08:47 PM
  24. Live2ride883's Avatar
    This: "If someone does decide to treat me differently because of my skin color, length of my hair, or any other reason, that is their problem, not mine. If I am told that a store will not serve me, I leave and find one that will. I will not lose days, weeks, or months of my life forcing someone to serve me. There is not enough time for me to worry about that kind of stuff."

    As for the comment that was made earlier about a business not being a church, my faith is a part of every aspect of my life. Yes it determines who I socialize with, where I do business, it is a very large part of my life.

    As for the question you want answered, I wasn't there. I can tell you that personally I do not discriminate against anyone based on the color of their skin, or any disability they may have.

    It is my CHOICE where I spend my money, just the same as anyone else. What I do disagree with is people sueing for the smallest little offense, like the photographer, or the bakery.

    And Harvey Milk was a disgusting person, a sexual predator, and a pederast. I think it cheapens the legacy of Rosa Parks, MLk to have his name in the same sentence as theirs.

    Sexual Predator Honored With U.S. Postage Stamp - Matt Barber - Page 1

    Harvey Milk Was An 'Evil Man' Who Raped Teenage Boys, Unworthy Of Postage Stamp: Matt Barber
    toober likes this.
    02-23-2014 09:09 PM
  25. nolittdroid's Avatar
    You didn't answer my questions. Do you think that no person has been killed for being gay? Or beaten? Or fired from a job? Or not allowed to marry? Or refused service at a restaurant? All things done to both blacks AND gays. Are the struggles exactly the same? No, no group's is. But the number of similarities far outweigh the number of differences. But more to the point, it's not a contest. Do I think women have had less of a struggle because I know of no woman who was tied to a fence and left for dead because she wanted to vote or have equal pay? No. So for you to put it into some sort of ranking or pecking order or to dismiss me and my concerns is rather ridiculous. Everyone should be treated equally, no matter their group. The dismissal that my rights are not a civil rights issue was the EXACT kind of thing I mentioned earlier...."just accept it", "Just live with it", "Just go somewhere else". Why should I have to? What is it about my rights that you don't view in the same regard? I would like to know.



    Good thing everyone doesn't think that way or else nothing would ever change. Thanks goodness for the likes of MLK, Rosa Parks, Harvey Milk and more recently Edith Windsor who weren't okay with just not worrying about things. They DID worry. And they made a fuss. And change happened because of it.
    And no one is saying that the Jim Crow laws weren't awful. There is a new civil rights movement every few generations in America. I'd say that racism is one of our biggest problems socially, but many people think we've moved on. Black president, better laws, legislation, etc. The LGBT movement is younger, less obvious and invokes religion into question. Many people believe you can be changed, and that you choose to be gay. Others say it violates their religion...I don't really know how but I think that's just what they've been told.

    Publicly committing any kind discrimination of any kind violates our constitution. You always have the choice to "discriminate" against people while operating any kind of business, for different reasons but there are a few "exceptions" that are illegal, religion, race, gender etc. I do not see why it is necessary to allow people to turn away gay people? Coming out and saying "its okay to turn away gay people at your business" screams political to me. Religion is the scapegoat excuse for many different things these days. Its genius in a really calculated way.

    I hope I made sense, I admit this is a thought I had after reading your question. /ramble

    SG3/iPad2/OG NookColor
    02-23-2014 09:58 PM
1,813 ... 6061626364 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Automatic time zone and date/clock are wrong
    By ajua in forum HTC One M7
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 07-04-2018, 01:12 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-05-2013, 10:34 AM
  3. Using the TMobile Note 2 in Asia (not Japan & Korea) and Europe for 3G internet
    By Internet_Tough_Guy in forum T-Mobile Galaxy Note 2
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-27-2013, 01:54 PM
  4. Icon question and SMS question
    By JT Peters in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-26-2013, 02:55 PM
  5. USA today review and water damage...
    By quietlybrilliant in forum Samsung Galaxy S4 Active
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-26-2013, 11:13 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD