The Wow I Can't Believe That News Story Thread

[OccultHawk]

Originally Posted by Kiiii

I can understand both sides however I do think the guy has the freedom to reject any inquiries he gets since it is his business. Would I personally use his service now? Probably not. But that doesn't mean other people shouldnt. Yeah it's a ****ty thing but he didn't force the wo men to go to his shop.

I wouldn’t give that homophobic **** any of my money either.

[Key]

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

I wouldn’t give that homophobic **** any of my money either.

Basically yeah. His business may or may not be effected but he's still within his rights. Unless he actively told them he's not making it because they're gay. Then it's an issue.

[Exo]

Originally Posted by Frownland

I would argue that it's unconstitutional because the court has decided that his religious beliefs are more valuable than equal treatment, which is in turn endorsing a religion, violating the establishment clause. Cases like this are why we have both freedom of religion and freedom from religion.

I think your point would be better suited if the couple was trying to get married which is a right that should be exercised by every citizen. You don't have a right to cake.

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by Exo

I think your point would be better suited if the couple was trying to get married which is a right that should be exercised by every citizen. You don't have a right to cake.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

[Exo]

Originally Posted by Frownland

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The other night I was at a bar and the bartender refused to serve a couple that came in because they refused to tip the last time they drank there. It was his bar. He had every right to not serve them. That was his choice.

I bring this up not to compare a homosexual couple to assh*les but rather compare the "right" to beer and the "right" to cake. You don't have a right to either of those. A cake shop and a bar are not hospitals, post offices, ect...

Dude is an awful twat of a person and I hope they change the laws to exclude religious belief in the denial of any service but we don't have that yet so I don't disagree with the ruling of the court. They called it how it is at the present moment.

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by Exo

The other night I was at a bar and the bartender refused to serve a couple that came in because they refused to tip the last time they drank there. It was his bar. He had every right to not serve them. That was his choice.

False equivalency.

I bring this up not to compare a homosexual couple to assh*les but rather compare the "right" to beer and the "right" to cake. You don't have a right to either of those. A cake shop and a bar are not hospitals, post offices, ect...

Dude is an awful twat of a person and I hope they change the laws to exclude religious belief in the denial of any service but we don't have that yet so I don't disagree with the ruling of the court. They called it how it is at the present moment.

Can you refuse service based on race if you can cite a religious justification?

[Exo]

Originally Posted by Frownland

Can you refuse service based on race if you can cite a religious justification?

Civil rights act of '64 already states that a private business can not discriminate based on race, color, religion or national origin. Unfortunately we haven't included, at least to my knowledge, sexuality into that language.

So your question doesn't have much to do with what I'm talking about as much as you think my bar story doesn't.

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by Exo

Civil rights act of '64 already states that a private business can not discriminate based on race, color, religion or national origin. Unfortunately we haven't included, at least to my knowledge, sexuality into that language.

So if we have those protections for something as innate such as race, wouldn't denying those protections based on something as innate as sexuality be unequal protection under the law?

Originally Posted by Frownland

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Also, establishment clause.

[Exo]

Originally Posted by Frownland

So if we have those protections for something as innate such as race, wouldn't denying those protections based on something as innate as sexuality be unequal protection under the law?

I think you underestimate how sh*t our laws still are in our country dude.

I'm not making opinionated statements here. I'm interpreting the law how it's been set in regards to a supreme court ruling by which it's their job to interpret the law.

EDIT: If I make a mistake in the way the laws are laid out, please correct me.

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by Exo

I think you underestimate how sh*t our laws still are in our country dude.

I'm building my whole argument on the **** laws of our country.