If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Today: "There will NEVER be a gay marriage at my wedding venue." Near Future: "This charming little wedding venue is priced to sell, after the previous owners were forced into bankruptcy"   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 289
    More: Obvious, Illinois, Ken Hutcherson, Friends of Lesbians, Societal attitudes toward homosexuality, Family Equality Council, Levi Strauss, Tom Emmer, Gay Days  
•       •       •

8111 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Jan 2014 at 8:33 AM (27 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



289 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-01-22 08:36:16 AM
Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.
 
2014-01-22 08:37:04 AM
I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.
 
2014-01-22 08:38:15 AM

kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.


Who's forcing anyone to do anything?
 
2014-01-22 08:39:40 AM
Probably not a good business decision for a bed & breakfast to offend 40% your clientele.

/made up that number, but I'm close
 
2014-01-22 08:39:47 AM
The only reason to refuse a gay wedding would be if one of the grooms was so persnickety the man-hours required would cut into the profit margin - otherwise? Cash in!
 
2014-01-22 08:40:04 AM
Just ignore the dumbass B&B owner and let him die with hate in his heart.  Hopefully, sooner than later.
 
2014-01-22 08:40:31 AM
Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.
 
2014-01-22 08:40:31 AM

kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.


No one is forcing anyone to do anything. Just outing the bigots so they know who not to do business with.
 
DGS [TotalFark]
2014-01-22 08:40:48 AM
If he wants to run his business that way, go for it. He has that freedom. Of course, others have the freedom to make it clear to other potential customers that the individual running that establishment is a bigot because god. That may dissuade others from wanting to give him business... just as it may make others want to give him business. Something something free market something.
 
2014-01-22 08:41:15 AM
If you don't want to host a gay wedding, then simply refuse. Don't give reasons. Racism and discrimination is a-ok as long as you don't say it is because of racism/discrimination.

Also, just how big is the LGBT community in that town?
 
2014-01-22 08:42:57 AM

Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.


You're not a private business if you open your doors to the public. This has been the law for decades.
 
2014-01-22 08:43:11 AM

Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.


I agree 100%. And I look forward to them being remembered in the not-so-distant future the same way we remember those valiant, rugged businessmen who said they would never serve blacks in their establishments.  Because we remember those people for taking a brave stand for private business, right?
 
2014-01-22 08:43:21 AM

kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.


"No coloreds"
 
DGS [TotalFark]
2014-01-22 08:43:24 AM

lucksi: If you don't want to host a gay wedding, then simply refuse. Don't give reasons. Racism and discrimination is a-ok as long as you don't say it is because of racism/discrimination.

Also, just how big is the LGBT community in that town?


I don't think I've ever gone to a local B&B in the past. Is this a thing? If I'm doing that it's because I'm getting out of town but don't want some big hotel chain.
 
2014-01-22 08:44:07 AM

qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?


Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

I'm as pro gay marriage as it comes, but disagree forcing these companies to do business if they don't want. I also don't understand why a couple would be adamant about giving that person business if they're adamantly against their lifestyle.
 
2014-01-22 08:44:47 AM
Unfortunately, this is why you'll never get a child-free flight or restaurant. Bah.
 
2014-01-22 08:45:18 AM
Once they're done forcing you to marry homosexuals, they'll start forcing you to perform late term abortions. After that you'll be forced to operate the gas chambers in which they will put all the climate change deniers. And they won't even see the irony, because their brains don't work that way.
 
2014-01-22 08:45:44 AM
You know, I like these folks, people who will take a stand that is not only unpopular now, but will be judged as downright evil by future historians.  History needs its villains, and bravo for all these bigoted farks providing fodder for those thirty to forty years from now who need people to hold up as examples of real human evil. Much like the anti-civil rights folks of the 60s, and the Nazis before them, these folks are providing a valuable service, being history's douchenozzles.
 
2014-01-22 08:45:56 AM

Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.


Blame the South.
 
2014-01-22 08:47:18 AM
Speaking from experience, there are worse places in the United States than Paxton, IL, although I am unable to come up with one at the moment.
 
2014-01-22 08:48:10 AM
Seriously? Another one of these threads? FARK has become the rally point for the LGBT community of late. There truly is no hate like the oppressed with a enough to finance a lawsuit.

I need another misogynist boobie thread. Please, I beg of you.
 
2014-01-22 08:49:10 AM
Someone in this thread is trying way too hard.
 
2014-01-22 08:49:25 AM

Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.


The headline needs an IRONIC tag, since a large portion of bed and breakfast business is provided by gay couples, and he somehow fails to realize this.  He couldn't be hurting his business more if he advertised turd punch for breakfast.
 
DGS [TotalFark]
2014-01-22 08:49:31 AM

rikkitikkitavi: Seriously? Another one of these threads? FARK has become the rally point for the LGBT community of late. There truly is no hate like the oppressed with a enough to finance a lawsuit.

I need another misogynist boobie thread. Please, I beg of you.


Are you even reading the responses?
 
2014-01-22 08:49:36 AM

gshepnyc: Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.

I agree 100%. And I look forward to them being remembered in the not-so-distant future the same way we remember those valiant, rugged businessmen who said they would never serve blacks in their establishments.  Because we remember those people for taking a brave stand for private business, right?


Is there something similar to Godwin where instead of bringing up Nazis we bring up segregation?

"We have the right to refuse service" is different than "No Coloreds".

Again though, I could care less. Just trying to figure out the full issue to these bandwagons people hop on.
 
2014-01-22 08:50:02 AM
joness0154:

Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

No, they are not being forced to do anything.  They made a choice to sell wedding cakes.  That choice requires them to sell wedding cakes to everyone.  They have a very simple way to avoid making cakes for same sex couples.  Don't sell wedding cakes.  They chose to start a business that would put them in a position that requires them to violate their religious beliefs.  They can easily choose to leave that business as well.
 
2014-01-22 08:50:24 AM
40% of marriages are now LGBT????

I think someone really pulled a stat out of their backcrack.
 
DGS [TotalFark]
2014-01-22 08:50:27 AM

Penoatle: Again though, I could care less.


How much less? Sounds like you do care.
 
2014-01-22 08:50:56 AM

THE GREAT NAME: Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.

 

THE GREAT NAME: Once they're done forcing you to marry homosexuals, they'll start forcing you to perform late term abortions. After that you'll be forced to operate the gas chambers in which they will put all the climate change deniers. And they won't even see the irony, because their brains don't work that way.


Way too obvious. 0/10.
 
2014-01-22 08:51:00 AM

joness0154: Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

I'm as pro gay marriage as it comes, but disagree forcing these companies to do business if they don't want. I also don't understand why a couple would be adamant about giving that person business if they're adamantly against their lifestyle.


The same reason businesses were/are forced to server "coloreds". Or if you swapped out gay couple in this scenario and put an interracial couple in instead. If you can't deal with the public, in all it's color and fabulousness, don't operate a public establishment.
 
2014-01-22 08:51:02 AM

DGS: rikkitikkitavi: Seriously? Another one of these threads? FARK has become the rally point for the LGBT community of late. There truly is no hate like the oppressed with a enough to finance a lawsuit.

I need another misogynist boobie thread. Please, I beg of you.

Are you even reading the responses?


You do know where this is vectored, right? Really... The first 12 responses will be trounced in a sea of "bigot, racist, neanderthal" and it will go on, and on and on for 500 odd posts.  Just like yesterday. And the day before.
 
2014-01-22 08:52:25 AM

qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?


Obama and his caring.  Really the rate this is going it's going to be illegal to operate your business based on your beliefs and solely within the confines of government oversight.
 
2014-01-22 08:52:46 AM

belome: 40% of marriages are now LGBT????

I think someone really pulled a stat out of their backcrack.


I think he/she is implying that 40% of B&B business is LGBT.  Which could be very close to correct, assuming four times as many LGBT frequent B&B's than the straight community.
 
2014-01-22 08:52:57 AM

rikkitikkitavi: I need another misogynist boobie thread. Please, I beg of you.


No one is going to submit that for you, so you'd better get busy.  Meanwhile we'll stay busy here, making fun of this clueless dickhead.
 
2014-01-22 08:53:59 AM
I would cancel my straight wedding if I heard this guy was into sending his clients bible verses concerning their private lives. That's beyond douchey.
 
2014-01-22 08:56:06 AM
Preemptively declining people's money is always a sound business strategy.

But, then, I suppose you can never underestimate the intelligence of your average homophobe.

belome: 40% of marriages are now LGBT????

I think someone really pulled a stat out of their backcrack.


Or maybe the recent spate of rulings and votes to allow it have created a temporary bubble as people who have wanted to get married for years but were unable rushed to complete the ceremonies.
 
2014-01-22 08:56:12 AM

qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?


If you dont have healthcare you can continue not to jave healthcare unless you want to be fined for not having healthcare.

/ I know, its persausion not forcing
 
2014-01-22 08:57:08 AM

Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.


Perhaps because we have central banks that can fire up the fake money presses and print up what ever amount it takes to get their way. Maybe moving the population in the direction of getting use to taking it anally is helpful to their plans.

I figure they have counterfeited the entire money supply over and over so many times we no longer own or have a say in anything.
 
2014-01-22 08:57:15 AM
Sheesh.  You guys were cool as the underdog.  Now you're a bunch of oversized assholes.
 
2014-01-22 08:57:27 AM

gshepnyc: Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.

I agree 100%. And I look forward to them being remembered in the not-so-distant future the same way we remember those valiant, rugged businessmen who said they would never serve blacks in their establishments.  Because we remember those people for taking a brave stand for private business, right?


Rand Paul does. One of his beefs with civil rights is that business people have to serve other races even if they don't want to.
 
2014-01-22 08:57:57 AM
He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.
 
2014-01-22 08:58:33 AM

rikkitikkitavi: belome: 40% of marriages are now LGBT????

I think someone really pulled a stat out of their backcrack.

I think he/she is implying that 40% of B&B business is LGBT.  Which could be very close to correct, assuming four times as many LGBT frequent B&B's than the straight community.


Well the G B and T maybe but the L portion of the community rents cabins in the woods.
 
2014-01-22 08:58:46 AM

my lip balm addiction: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

No one is forcing anyone to do anything. Just outing the bigots so they know who not to do business with.


I'll gladly do business with them.
 
2014-01-22 08:58:46 AM

Penoatle: Is there something similar to Godwin where instead of bringing up Nazis we bring up segregation?

"We have the right to refuse service" is different than "No Coloreds".


But "No Gays" is the same as "No Coloreds".

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/when-can-a-business-re fu se-service.html
 
2014-01-22 08:59:28 AM

HenryFnord: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

"No coloreds"


This circumstance is different. This person's discrimination is motivated by religious belief, therefore it must be allowed. Religious belief creates special justification otherwise not present for objectionable behaviour.
 
2014-01-22 09:00:02 AM

StokeyBob: Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.

Perhaps because we have central banks that can fire up the fake money presses and print up what ever amount it takes to get their way. Maybe moving the population in the direction of getting use to taking it anally is helpful to their plans.

I figure they have counterfeited the entire money supply over and over so many times we no longer own or have a say in anything.


8/10.  Needed "0bama" or some mention of farting, but you'll still get some bites.
 
2014-01-22 09:00:36 AM

rikkitikkitavi: belome: 40% of marriages are now LGBT????

I think someone really pulled a stat out of their backcrack.

I think he/she is implying that 40% of B&B business is LGBT.  Which could be very close to correct, assuming four times as many LGBT frequent B&B's than the straight community.


Straights:  So the next time you stay at a B&B, think about how much buttsecks has been had on that bed and how much santorum is on the walls.
 
2014-01-22 09:00:57 AM
So they're going to go out of business because they won't do business with people they've never done business with? They've managed to stay in business up too now without same sex weddings.
 
2014-01-22 09:01:01 AM
Yeah, I'm sure the straight marriage market is really going to dry up.  Especially among the asshole demographic.
 
2014-01-22 09:02:09 AM

wxboy: Penoatle: Is there something similar to Godwin where instead of bringing up Nazis we bring up segregation?

"We have the right to refuse service" is different than "No Coloreds".

But "No Gays" is the same as "No Coloreds".

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/when-can-a-business-re fu se-service.html


Okay. I can see how it works like that. Thanks for the link.
 
2014-01-22 09:02:36 AM
See? It didn't take lawsuits or court time.
 
2014-01-22 09:02:38 AM

Dimensio: HenryFnord: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

"No coloreds"

This circumstance is different. This person's discrimination is motivated by religious belief, therefore it must be allowed. Religious belief creates special justification otherwise not present for objectionable behaviour.


What if you religious belief include "No coloreds"?

Fark religious beliefs.  Just because someone choices to believe in a sky wizard, doesn't mean they deserve special rights.
 
2014-01-22 09:02:59 AM
FTA (in a letter he wrote to some gay people): "It's not too late to change your behavior."

They always focus on the behavior. Love the sinner, hate the sin. It's the acting it out part they dwell on, not the impulses or urges or preference or identity, but the actual physical act of gay sex they can't seem to stop thinking about.
 
2014-01-22 09:03:48 AM

flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.


Uhmm, not sure if you're serious? Record revenue in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013... so, no, that didn't have the effect I think they thought it would.

/not pro-bible
//not pro-hate
///pro good chicken
 
2014-01-22 09:03:56 AM

Buttknuckle: rikkitikkitavi: belome: 40% of marriages are now LGBT????

I think someone really pulled a stat out of their backcrack.

I think he/she is implying that 40% of B&B business is LGBT.  Which could be very close to correct, assuming four times as many LGBT frequent B&B's than the straight community.

Straights:  So the next time you stay at a B&B, think about how much buttsecks has been had on that bed and how much santorum is on the walls.


Straight people don't have buttsecks? How boring all those missionary style couples are.
 
2014-01-22 09:03:57 AM

serial_crusher: Yeah, I'm sure the straight marriage market is really going to dry up.  Especially among the asshole demographic.


The asshole demographic is staying at the Super 8, not a B&B.
 
2014-01-22 09:04:26 AM

physt: Dimensio: HenryFnord: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

"No coloreds"

This circumstance is different. This person's discrimination is motivated by religious belief, therefore it must be allowed. Religious belief creates special justification otherwise not present for objectionable behaviour.

What if you religious belief include "No coloreds"?

Fark religious beliefs.  Just because someone choices to believe in a sky wizard, doesn't mean they deserve special rights.


Thatsthejoke.jpg
 
2014-01-22 09:05:01 AM

Dimensio: HenryFnord: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

"No coloreds"

This circumstance is different. This person's discrimination is motivated by religious belief, therefore it must be allowed. Religious belief creates special justification otherwise not present for objectionable behaviour.


Is there a limit on the use of religion to justify not following laws?  Do you also think Hobby Lobby has the right to refuse to offer their employees health insurance that includes coverage for birth control based on the owner's religious belief?.
 
2014-01-22 09:05:21 AM

ElwoodCuse: Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.

You're not a private business if you open your doors to the public. This has been the law for decades.


Does "open your doors to the public" apply to a Bed and Breakfast, where you have to make reservations?
I could see that statement applying to a restaurant or store or whatever where people can just walk in off the street, but isn't this a little different?
I'm not really familiar with the laws around this.
 
2014-01-22 09:05:55 AM
more than 50% of the comments so far contain commonsense, see how Public Opinion works?
 The more people hear/read/think about this the more obvious the flaws are.

The times are changing, once again.
because Abuse
 
2014-01-22 09:06:20 AM

rikkitikkitavi: flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.

Uhmm, not sure if you're serious? Record revenue in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013... so, no, that didn't have the effect I think they thought it would.

/not pro-bible
//not pro-hate
///pro good chicken


Sarcasm can be hard to detect in text format.
 
2014-01-22 09:07:38 AM
namegoeshere: Straight people don't have buttsecks? How boring all those missionary style couples are.

Does pegging count?
 
2014-01-22 09:08:33 AM

rikkitikkitavi: flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.

Uhmm, not sure if you're serious? Record revenue in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013... so, no, that didn't have the effect I think they thought it would.

/not pro-bible
//not pro-hate
///pro good chicken


Public Opinion
How does it work?

Very well, thank you.
 
2014-01-22 09:08:53 AM
Gay couples have a right to equal access to public accommodations.  Private business owners have the right to be homophobic dickheads.  When push comes to shove in a court action to resolve this conflict, guess who almost always wins?

Hint:  There has to be a legitimate business interest for the refusal of service.
 
2014-01-22 09:09:02 AM

rikkitikkitavi: Seriously? Another one of these threads? FARK has become the rally point for the LGBT community of late. There truly is no hate like the oppressed with a enough to finance a lawsuit.

I need another misogynist boobie thread. Please, I beg of you.


Now now.  They preach "Diversity" and "Tolerance".
 
2014-01-22 09:09:04 AM

Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS

santorum from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.


FTFY.
 
2014-01-22 09:10:22 AM

flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.


Really?   Chick-fil-a at the mall seems to be doing really well.  Big lines during lunch time.
 
2014-01-22 09:10:39 AM

mistrmind: rikkitikkitavi: Seriously? Another one of these threads? FARK has become the rally point for the LGBT community of late. There truly is no hate like the oppressed with a enough to finance a lawsuit.

I need another misogynist boobie thread. Please, I beg of you.

Now now.  They preach "Diversity" and "Tolerance".


I settle for some side-boob. Even.
 
2014-01-22 09:11:24 AM
The free market has spoken.
 
2014-01-22 09:11:32 AM

DGS: If he wants to run his business that way, go for it. He has that freedom. Of course, others have the freedom to make it clear to other potential customers that the individual running that establishment is a bigot because god. That may dissuade others from wanting to give him business... just as it may make others want to give him business. Something something free market something.


Would he be free to refuse black customers?
 
2014-01-22 09:11:35 AM

Mr. Coffee Nerves: The only reason to refuse a gay wedding would be if one of the grooms was so persnickety the man-hours required would cut into the profit margin - otherwise? Cash in!


You obviously haven't seen what a dozen interior decorators can do to a place after a few rounds of mimosa.

Still better than the lesbians with their damn golden retrievers, though.
 
2014-01-22 09:12:04 AM

Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.


Because:

karani.files.wordpress.com

/although if you tell them it's the same, you better have a bunker full of popcorn ready
 
2014-01-22 09:12:15 AM

kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.


You can't.  But The Free MarketTM can force people to keep their ugly and hateful thoughts to themselves.
 
2014-01-22 09:14:00 AM
Possible alternative headline:

Illinois Man Staunch Defender of What He Believes Traditional Marriage to Be.
 
2014-01-22 09:14:34 AM

Buttknuckle: I think he/she is implying that 40% of B&B business is LGBT. Which could be very close to correct, assuming four times as many LGBT frequent B&B's than the straight community.

Straights: So the next time you stay at a B&B, think about how much buttsecks has been had on that bed and how much santorum is on the walls.


On the bright side, think of how many lesbians have scissored in that same bed.
 
2014-01-22 09:15:25 AM

Vagina Boob: Sheesh.  You guys were cool as the underdog.  Now you're a bunch of oversized assholes.


I know, right? I mean black people were cool until they insisted on being served at lunch counters.
 
2014-01-22 09:15:35 AM

whatsupchuck: Gay couples have a right to equal access to public accommodations.  Private business owners have the right to be homophobic dickheads.  When push comes to shove in a court action to resolve this conflict, guess who almost always wins?

Hint:  There has to be a legitimate business interest for the refusal of service.


I'm not sure that's true.  The basic problem here is that while gay marriage may be legal, anti-discrimination laws against LGBT individuals are not on the books.  The business owner can't overtly discriminate and deny service based on race like putting up a "No Coloreds" sign.  But he can refuse service to gay couples, and he's legally ok to do so.  Now, what you hope is that fair minded people use the power of moral outrage to either change this guy's position or drive him out of business, but if Chick-Fil-A is any example, that won't happen.

By the way, I'm completely in favor of protests, and using every other legal means to drive him out of business.  If you are going to take that strident a stand, you better be prepared to accept and deal with the fallout as a result.
 
2014-01-22 09:15:54 AM

flondrix: Buttknuckle: I think he/she is implying that 40% of B&B business is LGBT. Which could be very close to correct, assuming four times as many LGBT frequent B&B's than the straight community.

Straights: So the next time you stay at a B&B, think about how much buttsecks has been had on that bed and how much santorum is on the walls.

On the bright side, think of how many lesbians have scissored in that same bed.


These are not the lesbians you're looking for.
 
2014-01-22 09:16:30 AM

Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.



Why do you hate the free market?
 
2014-01-22 09:16:43 AM

Fafai: FTA (in a letter he wrote to some gay people): "It's not too late to change your behavior."

They always focus on the behavior. Love the sinner, hate the sin. It's the acting it out part they dwell on, not the impulses or urges or preference or identity, but the actual physical act of gay sex they can't seem to stop thinking about.


I'm pro-the gay marriage but what is wrong with love the sinner hate the sin? Conceptually I like the idea of Christians trying to love (or at least their God doing so) everyone but not liking individual acts.
Sort of like chronic gamblers: they love the person but don't like they spend every paycheck on slot machines.
So while you might not like their choice of seeing being gay as a bad behavior it doesn't mean their entire system is flawed.
 
2014-01-22 09:17:00 AM

John the Magnificent: Possible alternative headline:

Illinois Man Staunch Defender of What He Believes Traditional Marriage to Be.


*snert*
 
2014-01-22 09:17:02 AM

wxboy: Is there a limit on the use of religion to justify not following laws?


Based upon my reading of advocates of such exceptions, only followers of their specific sect of Christianity may be exempted.
 
2014-01-22 09:18:59 AM

DGS: lucksi: If you don't want to host a gay wedding, then simply refuse. Don't give reasons. Racism and discrimination is a-ok as long as you don't say it is because of racism/discrimination.

Also, just how big is the LGBT community in that town?

I don't think I've ever gone to a local B&B in the past. Is this a thing? If I'm doing that it's because I'm getting out of town but don't want some big hotel chain.


When it comes to renting the place as a wedding venue, you might see some more local business.  Not everyone does a "destination wedding".

But as for the tourist trade...if he refused to rent his romantic B&B to fornicators and adulterers, it would seriously cramp his business.  I wonder what his policy is on that.
 
2014-01-22 09:22:48 AM

Dimensio: HenryFnord: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

"No coloreds"

This circumstance is different. This person's discrimination is motivated by religious belief, therefore it must be allowed. Religious belief creates special justification otherwise not present for objectionable behaviour.


False.

This person's CLAIM is that it's motivated by religious belief, yet they seem to ONLY APPLY said belief when it comes to same-sex couples.

Otherwise, they'd refuse service to anyone who didn't share their religious beliefs: no Jews, no Muslims, no atheists, no pagans, no DIVORCED people, and so on.

The "justification" you refer to applies to not being discriminated because of your OWN religious affiliation; if you're Hindu the B&B can't deny you service because you're a Hindu.  It's not a club you can use to conveniently exclude a section of the general population from services you provide to the general population.   Of course this doesn't apply to religious organizations;  a Catholic church doesn't have to host a Hindu wedding.   But this B&B isn't a church - it just wants to be a B&B that conveniently only ever has heterosexuals present.

Plus if you gave your "justification" ANY amount of thought, you'd realize it's just a smokescreen: let's use an obvious example:

A: Evangelical B&B owner claims he has the right to deny service if it would "violate his beliefs"
B: Potential client is a Muslim who will want to pray in his rented room

Whose religious beliefs trump whose?  If A wins, then it's an obvious discrimination of B on the basis of religion which is a violation of the 14th Amendment.   If B wins, then it's (by your logic) discrimination of A on the basis of religion which is a violation of the 14th Amendment.

... at which point the universe becomes lawyers all the way down.
 
2014-01-22 09:23:22 AM
Penoatle:

Again though, I could care less. Just trying to figure out the full issue to these bandwagons people hop on.

Well then you probably SHOULD care less and stop posting.

Seriously, get your phrases correct if you're going to attempt superiority.
 
2014-01-22 09:25:17 AM

Close2TheEdge: But he can refuse service to gay couples, and he's legally ok to do so.


Um, what jurisdiction? Considering the two bakeries found guilty of discrimination, no, they're not legally okay to do so in every state, and there _are_ laws on the books.
 
2014-01-22 09:26:05 AM

Close2TheEdge: whatsupchuck: Gay couples have a right to equal access to public accommodations.  Private business owners have the right to be homophobic dickheads.  When push comes to shove in a court action to resolve this conflict, guess who almost always wins?

Hint:  There has to be a legitimate business interest for the refusal of service.

I'm not sure that's true.  The basic problem here is that while gay marriage may be legal, anti-discrimination laws against LGBT individuals are not on the books.  The business owner can't overtly discriminate and deny service based on race like putting up a "No Coloreds" sign.  But he can refuse service to gay couples, and he's legally ok to do so.  Now, what you hope is that fair minded people use the power of moral outrage to either change this guy's position or drive him out of business, but if Chick-Fil-A is any example, that won't happen.

By the way, I'm completely in favor of protests, and using every other legal means to drive him out of business.  If you are going to take that strident a stand, you better be prepared to accept and deal with the fallout as a result.


It's illegal in Illinois to deny service based on sexual orientation
 
2014-01-22 09:26:43 AM

lelio: Fafai: FTA (in a letter he wrote to some gay people): "It's not too late to change your behavior."

They always focus on the behavior. Love the sinner, hate the sin. It's the acting it out part they dwell on, not the impulses or urges or preference or identity, but the actual physical act of gay sex they can't seem to stop thinking about.

I'm pro-the gay marriage but what is wrong with love the sinner hate the sin? Conceptually I like the idea of Christians trying to love (or at least their God doing so) everyone but not liking individual acts.
Sort of like chronic gamblers: they love the person but don't like they spend every paycheck on slot machines.
So while you might not like their choice of seeing being gay as a bad behavior it doesn't mean their entire system is flawed.


I'm just saying it always boils down to dick-in-ass sex. These people have their minds in the gutter.
 
2014-01-22 09:28:02 AM

Close2TheEdge: whatsupchuck: Gay couples have a right to equal access to public accommodations.  Private business owners have the right to be homophobic dickheads.  When push comes to shove in a court action to resolve this conflict, guess who almost always wins?

Hint:  There has to be a legitimate business interest for the refusal of service.

I'm not sure that's true.  The basic problem here is that while gay marriage may be legal, anti-discrimination laws against LGBT individuals are not on the books.  The business owner can't overtly discriminate and deny service based on race like putting up a "No Coloreds" sign.  But he can refuse service to gay couples, and he's legally ok to do so.  Now, what you hope is that fair minded people use the power of moral outrage to either change this guy's position or drive him out of business, but if Chick-Fil-A is any example, that won't happen.

By the way, I'm completely in favor of protests, and using every other legal means to drive him out of business.  If you are going to take that strident a stand, you better be prepared to accept and deal with the fallout as a result.


Varies by state. Sexual orientation is a protected class in WA and possibly any that have legal gay marriage. But you are correct, they can legally discriminate against any non protected class. Which is why we never read/care about furries being denied service. That said, the state can and should revoke your license for asshatish behavior. It's their choice to allow you to conduct business within the border.
 
2014-01-22 09:28:04 AM

flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.


Yes, Chik-fil-a learned they could make a tidy sum by serving cheap sandwiches to bigots who think their bigotry is religion. But B&Bs tend to cost a good bit more than a chicken sandwich. The tend to cost more than a hotel room in the area. The clientele at a B&B tend to like things like frilly or flowery rooms, antique furniture, lots of flowers, and brunch, so we're not talking about couples made up of stereotypically manly men and their obedient wives as a rule. In my experience, it's usually the wife who chooses the B&B, not the husband. And women tend to be less freaked out by gay people unless they are married to closet cases.

Of course, gay people are not a protected class the way black people are, so this man is within his legal rights to be a dick. And gay people are within their legal rights to let everyone know that the person who runs this B&B is a dick. If word gets out that the "lovely" B&B is administered by a hater, his may have no effect on his business. But I am willing to bet that it might.
 
2014-01-22 09:28:32 AM

rikkitikkitavi: flondrix: Buttknuckle: I think he/she is implying that 40% of B&B business is LGBT. Which could be very close to correct, assuming four times as many LGBT frequent B&B's than the straight community.

Straights: So the next time you stay at a B&B, think about how much buttsecks has been had on that bed and how much santorum is on the walls.

On the bright side, think of how many lesbians have scissored in that same bed.

These are not the lesbians you're looking for.


I'm free to imagine the lesbians looking however I like. They're supermodels for all I know.
Just like I'm free to imagine the gay men as sweaty greased up muscular firemen with rock hard pecs, six pack abs, and I'll be in my bunk.
 
2014-01-22 09:28:59 AM

my lip balm addiction: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

No one is forcing anyone to do anything. Just outing the bigots so they know who not to do business with.


Why are they bigots? Really, why? They think gay marriage is wrong. Gays think being against gay marriage is wrong, does that make them a bigot? I don't see where being a bigot comes on to play here
 
2014-01-22 09:30:02 AM

my lip balm addiction: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

No one is forcing anyone to do anything. Just outing the bigots so they know who not to do business with.


Why are they bigots? Really, why? They think gay marriage is wrong. Can one not have an opinion another disagrees with without you putting a derogatory stamp of disapproval on it? Gays think being against gay marriage is wrong, does that make them a bigot? I just don't see where being a bigot comes on to play here
 
2014-01-22 09:30:12 AM

joness0154: qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?

Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

I'm as pro gay marriage as it comes, but disagree forcing these companies to do business if they don't want. I also don't understand why a couple would be adamant about giving that person business if they're adamantly against their lifestyle.


Change the source of this article to it being about black people or an interracial couple. Your defense of said bigotry still fits. Why should those racists have to do business with a couple of darkies or darkie apologists....

It's because it's wrong to discriminate. If you are a bigot you will be found and painted as the bigot you are. People should know you're a bigot so they can vote with their wallet. You have a right to be a bigot and we have a right to know so we can refuse to patronize.
 
2014-01-22 09:30:25 AM
In this case, I support the venue's owner to refuse service.

I, likewise support the right for folks to discuss this policy, and refuse to do business with them based upon the commentary of their public statements.

Venues don't want to host same sex ceremonies: go for it. Just don't expect folks to be happy with that decision, and to talk about it in public as well. Freedom of speech is a sort of two edged sword. It isn't freedom from consequences. The market will eventually sort this sort of thing out.

A B&B not wanting to do business with gay or lesbian clients runs certain risks. Those risks are associated with that stance, and being vocal about it. I don't think that they should be sued for it, unless of course, they violate the privacy of their clients, or their potential clients, say by making public their list of folks that they won't do business with, and why, and then publish or allow to be published, lists that they've made.

Do I think it makes a helluva lot of sense to exclude clients, especially in these trying economic times? No. On a purely personal level, it shows a pettiness of spirit as well, and that is exactly the sort of thing that I'd like to know about. On a professional level, as well as on a personal one, as a chef, I want to know who is looking to exclude potential clients of my own. I don't want to cater for folks who are homophobes. If folks are talking in such a way to piss of my own clients, I want to know about it. I don't want to see them sued for it, but if they're making public statements like this, I want to know about it, so I can make sure that my business isn't associated with those statements. It's in my professional interests. On a personal level, I just don't want to help folks being dumbasses as well, and dickbags to boot.

The market will sort this out in time. In the meantime, please, proceed with your douchebaggery, because the more you talk about it, the better, because I'd rather you be up front about it, so I don't have to vet potential venues with a fine tooth comb. The louder you get, the easier it is to winnow lists down.
 
2014-01-22 09:32:22 AM

rikkitikkitavi: Seriously? Another one of these threads? FARK has become the rally point for the LGBT community of late. There truly is no hate like the oppressed with a enough to finance a lawsuit.

I need another misogynist boobie thread. Please, I beg of you.


"I...i could navigate to fark but can't seem to find the vast wealth of boobs available in just a few errant keypunches."
 
2014-01-22 09:32:39 AM

DeaH: DGS: If he wants to run his business that way, go for it. He has that freedom. Of course, others have the freedom to make it clear to other potential customers that the individual running that establishment is a bigot because god. That may dissuade others from wanting to give him business... just as it may make others want to give him business. Something something free market something.

Would he be free to refuse black customers?


We allow restaurants to discriminate based on age (lots of restaurants banning kids, etc.), allow pharmacists with religious beliefs to refuse to dispense the morning after pill, and allow hospitals & doctors to refuse to perform abortions.

Quite frankly, I think a business owner should be free to choose who he or she does business with, even if it discriminates.  They likely won't be in business very long - allowing it to be replaced by a business that, if it wants to survive, doesn't discriminate.
 
2014-01-22 09:35:39 AM
Let's just let the free market and the Internet take care of this one.
 
2014-01-22 09:36:06 AM

wxboy: Dimensio: HenryFnord: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

"No coloreds"

This circumstance is different. This person's discrimination is motivated by religious belief, therefore it must be allowed. Religious belief creates special justification otherwise not present for objectionable behaviour.

Is there a limit on the use of religion to justify not following laws?  Do you also think Hobby Lobby has the right to refuse to offer their employees health insurance that includes coverage for birth control based on the owner's religious belief?.


I do not. Religion not required to work at hobby lobby, and said religious preference would be neither employer not employees concern. Birth control being against your beliefs isn't my problem. You are welcome to not buy it or use it. My medical insurance is your problem as your employee. Your religion and beliefs have no place there. Cover me, and shut it.
 
2014-01-22 09:36:20 AM

Nacc: joness0154: qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?

Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

I'm as pro gay marriage as it comes, but disagree forcing these companies to do business if they don't want. I also don't understand why a couple would be adamant about giving that person business if they're adamantly against their lifestyle.

Change the source of this article to it being about black people or an interracial couple. Your defense of said bigotry still fits. Why should those racists have to do business with a couple of darkies or darkie apologists....

It's because it's wrong to discriminate. If you are a bigot you will be found and painted as the bigot you are. People should know you're a bigot so they can vote with their wallet. You have a right to be a bigot and we have a right to know so we can refuse to patronize.


Like my post above this, I think a business should be able to refuse to provide a service to anyone they please.  Like you said, people will call them out as bigots and vote with their wallets.  Hopefully that business doesn't prosper and is replaced with a business who provides their services to everyone.
 
2014-01-22 09:36:23 AM

DeaH: flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.

Yes, Chik-fil-a learned they could make a tidy sum by serving cheap sandwiches to bigots who think their bigotry is religion. But B&Bs tend to cost a good bit more than a chicken sandwich. The tend to cost more than a hotel room in the area. The clientele at a B&B tend to like things like frilly or flowery rooms, antique furniture, lots of flowers, and brunch, so we're not talking about couples made up of stereotypically manly men and their obedient wives as a rule. In my experience, it's usually the wife who chooses the B&B, not the husband. And women tend to be less freaked out by gay people unless they are married to closet cases.

Of course, gay people are not a protected class the way black people are, so this man is within his legal rights to be a dick. And gay people are within their legal rights to let everyone know that the person who runs this B&B is a dick. If word gets out that the "lovely" B&B is administered by a hater, his may have no effect on his business. But I am willing to bet that it might.


Last time I checked, when you order a sandwich at Chik-fil-a, they didn't ask you about your sexual orientation, they just served you a chicken sandwich.  in a nutshell, you have your panties in a bunch because the founder has an opinion about marriage and it doesn't fit into your definition of marriage.  So, the vindictive people you are go out and try to crush the company because of someone's opinion.  Nice way to win friends and influence people, BTW.   Keep preaching that diversity and tolerance.
 
2014-01-22 09:37:04 AM

Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.


You might as well be saying that private business should be able to be racist.
People said the same things about mixed race marriages only a few decades ago, that they were ungodly abominations that would invoke the wrath of god upon the entire nation. The "private business, private rules" argument suggests you believe a business owner should be allowed to refuse to do any business with couples whose skin pigmentation doesn't match identically.  Should he be allowed to refuse to do any business with a couple where one's Jewish and one's Irish?
 
2014-01-22 09:38:19 AM
Wow. For 5 percent or less of the populace, they sure do carry some weight.
 
2014-01-22 09:39:50 AM

Semantic Warrior: Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

You might as well be saying that private business should be able to be racist.
People said the same things about mixed race marriages only a few decades ago, that they were ungodly abominations that would invoke the wrath of god upon the entire nation. The "private business, private rules" argument suggests you believe a business owner should be allowed to refuse to do any business with couples whose skin pigmentation doesn't match identically.  Should he be allowed to refuse to do any business with a couple where one's Jewish and one's Irish?


Yes, if that's their prerogative.  Just as we are allowed to vote with our wallets and visit other businesses that will provide services to anyone.
 
2014-01-22 09:41:31 AM

Gdalescrboz: my lip balm addiction: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

No one is forcing anyone to do anything. Just outing the bigots so they know who not to do business with.

Why are they bigots? Really, why? They think gay marriage is wrong. Can one not have an opinion another disagrees with without you putting a derogatory stamp of disapproval on it? Gays think being against gay marriage is wrong, does that make them a bigot? I just don't see where being a bigot comes on to play here


How do I put this lightly?  Then, you are missing a few chromosomes.
 
2014-01-22 09:42:10 AM

Close2TheEdge: whatsupchuck: Gay couples have a right to equal access to public accommodations.  Private business owners have the right to be homophobic dickheads.  When push comes to shove in a court action to resolve this conflict, guess who almost always wins?

Hint:  There has to be a legitimate business interest for the refusal of service.

I'm not sure that's true.  The basic problem here is that while gay marriage may be legal, anti-discrimination laws against LGBT individuals are not on the books.  The business owner can't overtly discriminate and deny service based on race like putting up a "No Coloreds" sign.  But he can refuse service to gay couples, and he's legally ok to do so.


Yes and no... It's a little unclear in Illinois, since their anti discrimination law merely states "It is a civil rights violation for any person on the basis of unlawful discrimination to... deny or refuse to another the full and equal enjoyment of the facilities, goods, and services of any public place of accommodation" without specifically defining categories. That could include sexual orientation, or it may not.

Interestingly, there's this exception:
(A) Place of Public Accommodation. "Place of public accommodation" includes, but is not limited to: 
        (1) an inn, hotel, motel, or other place of lodging,
except for an establishment located within a building that contains not more than 5 units for rent or hire and that is actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment as the residence of such proprietor;

Most bed and breakfasts are under 5 rooms and are occupied by the proprietor. But not this guy... he's got six units for hire.
 
2014-01-22 09:42:44 AM
Is the creator of the universe really that concerned about gay unions when there black holes at the center of every galaxy sucking stars and planets into oblivion?
 
2014-01-22 09:43:47 AM

joness0154: DeaH: DGS: If he wants to run his business that way, go for it. He has that freedom. Of course, others have the freedom to make it clear to other potential customers that the individual running that establishment is a bigot because god. That may dissuade others from wanting to give him business... just as it may make others want to give him business. Something something free market something.

Would he be free to refuse black customers?

We allow restaurants to discriminate based on age (lots of restaurants banning kids, etc.), allow pharmacists with religious beliefs to refuse to dispense the morning after pill, and allow hospitals & doctors to refuse to perform abortions.

Quite frankly, I think a business owner should be free to choose who he or she does business with, even if it discriminates.  They likely won't be in business very long - allowing it to be replaced by a business that, if it wants to survive, doesn't discriminate.


So, your good with refusing black customers?
 
2014-01-22 09:43:58 AM

joness0154: qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?

Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

I'm as pro gay marriage as it comes, but disagree forcing these companies to do business if they don't want. I also don't understand why a couple would be adamant about giving that person business if they're adamantly against their lifestyle.


They are free to refuse to do business with gay couples. Other customers are free to take their business elsewhere. Generally speaking, refusing paying customers for any reason is not a good business strategy.
 
2014-01-22 09:44:31 AM

joness0154: Like my post above this, I think a business should be able to refuse to provide a service to anyone they please.  Like you said, people will call them out as bigots and vote with their wallets.  Hopefully that business doesn't prosper and is replaced with a business who provides their services to everyone.


Yeah, that doesn't work too well.
 
2014-01-22 09:45:34 AM

DeaH: joness0154: DeaH: DGS: If he wants to run his business that way, go for it. He has that freedom. Of course, others have the freedom to make it clear to other potential customers that the individual running that establishment is a bigot because god. That may dissuade others from wanting to give him business... just as it may make others want to give him business. Something something free market something.

Would he be free to refuse black customers?

We allow restaurants to discriminate based on age (lots of restaurants banning kids, etc.), allow pharmacists with religious beliefs to refuse to dispense the morning after pill, and allow hospitals & doctors to refuse to perform abortions.

Quite frankly, I think a business owner should be free to choose who he or she does business with, even if it discriminates.  They likely won't be in business very long - allowing it to be replaced by a business that, if it wants to survive, doesn't discriminate.

So, your good with refusing black customers?


Yes, as stated above.  I would never do it, as I'm not a racist prick, but a business owner should be able to serve who he or she wants to serve.

Like I and others have said, customers are also free to take their business elsewhere, and its very likely that business won't survive.
 
2014-01-22 09:45:42 AM

joness0154: Semantic Warrior: Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

You might as well be saying that private business should be able to be racist.
People said the same things about mixed race marriages only a few decades ago, that they were ungodly abominations that would invoke the wrath of god upon the entire nation. The "private business, private rules" argument suggests you believe a business owner should be allowed to refuse to do any business with couples whose skin pigmentation doesn't match identically.  Should he be allowed to refuse to do any business with a couple where one's Jewish and one's Irish?

Yes, if that's their prerogative.  Just as we are allowed to vote with our wallets and visit other businesses that will provide services to anyone.

Or get the laws changed so that the business owner can't get away with such shenanigans.

 
2014-01-22 09:46:06 AM
I don't consider lesbians homosexual because I'm hetro and enjoy watching. Not the same for two dudes.
 
2014-01-22 09:46:28 AM

Nogale: joness0154: qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?

Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

I'm as pro gay marriage as it comes, but disagree forcing these companies to do business if they don't want. I also don't understand why a couple would be adamant about giving that person business if they're adamantly against their lifestyle.

They are free to refuse to do business with gay couples. Other customers are free to take their business elsewhere. Generally speaking, refusing paying customers for any reason is not a good business strategy.


Agreed 100%
 
2014-01-22 09:47:22 AM

doubled99: Wow. For 5 percent or less of the populace, they sure do carry some weight.


I wasn't aware that the percent of American citizens who are personally opposed to any form of prejudice was only 5%.
 
2014-01-22 09:47:37 AM
Whatever......

If their convictions are more important to them than money? We should appreciate that perspective (but criticize them for failing to accept that two people in love may be the same sex).

I know too many people without morals who would do anything for financial gain. Although I may not agree with their beliefs..... It is refreshing to find someone who considers their beliefs more important than money.
 
2014-01-22 09:47:38 AM

Semantic Warrior: Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

You might as well be saying that private business should be able to be racist.
People said the same things about mixed race marriages only a few decades ago, that they were ungodly abominations that would invoke the wrath of god upon the entire nation. The "private business, private rules" argument suggests you believe a business owner should be allowed to refuse to do any business with couples whose skin pigmentation doesn't match identically.  Should he be allowed to refuse to do any business with a couple where one's Jewish and one's Irish?


Actually I may as well correct myself since WX linked an article that explained that a business can take a policy so far.

I can easily call an owner an asshole for refusing service based on bigotry compared to refusing service on a customer acting like an asshole.

I appreciate the time you took to call me out so I can make this correction.
 
2014-01-22 09:47:51 AM

Penoatle: Is there something similar to Godwin where instead of bringing up Nazis we bring up segregation?

"We have the right to refuse service" is different than "No Coloreds".


If you're consistently refusing service to a minority group based on an inherent and immutable characteristic, then no, it's no different.

/was mentioned in the thread yesterday, it's illegal to post a "we reserve the right to refuse service" sign in Colorado
 
2014-01-22 09:48:57 AM

GodComplex: Close2TheEdge: whatsupchuck: Gay couples have a right to equal access to public accommodations.  Private business owners have the right to be homophobic dickheads.  When push comes to shove in a court action to resolve this conflict, guess who almost always wins?

Hint:  There has to be a legitimate business interest for the refusal of service.

I'm not sure that's true.  The basic problem here is that while gay marriage may be legal, anti-discrimination laws against LGBT individuals are not on the books.  The business owner can't overtly discriminate and deny service based on race like putting up a "No Coloreds" sign.  But he can refuse service to gay couples, and he's legally ok to do so.  Now, what you hope is that fair minded people use the power of moral outrage to either change this guy's position or drive him out of business, but if Chick-Fil-A is any example, that won't happen.

By the way, I'm completely in favor of protests, and using every other legal means to drive him out of business.  If you are going to take that strident a stand, you better be prepared to accept and deal with the fallout as a result.

Varies by state. Sexual orientation is a protected class in WA and possibly any that have legal gay marriage. But you are correct, they can legally discriminate against any non protected class. Which is why we never read/care about furries being denied service. That said, the state can and should revoke your license for asshatish behavior. It's their choice to allow you to conduct business within the border.


I believe it's something approaching half of the states that have specific LGBT anti-discrimination laws on the books.  Even in those without, however, a business would be expected in court to explain how refusal of service supports a legitimate business interest.  Of course, in some places "because jesus" would probably fly.
 
2014-01-22 09:49:29 AM
Comparing to Chick-fil-a is apples/oranges. They didn't refuse service or employment to anyone. The owner was just donating HIS money to conservative family groups that were also anti-gay. So that was really just a political play and not a rights issue.
This a-hole is actually doing something discriminatory.
 
2014-01-22 09:51:00 AM

joness0154: Semantic Warrior: Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

You might as well be saying that private business should be able to be racist.
People said the same things about mixed race marriages only a few decades ago, that they were ungodly abominations that would invoke the wrath of god upon the entire nation. The "private business, private rules" argument suggests you believe a business owner should be allowed to refuse to do any business with couples whose skin pigmentation doesn't match identically.  Should he be allowed to refuse to do any business with a couple where one's Jewish and one's Irish?

Yes, if that's their prerogative.  Just as we are allowed to vote with our wallets and visit other businesses that will provide services to anyone.


In a city, this makes (some) sense, b/c there are dozens of options for everything you need.  But in the boonies, that's not the case.  If you're the only gay Eskimo in your tribe, and your spear-maker is a homophobe, where the fark do you get your spears?   When you do business with the public, you do business with  all the public, even the parts you don't like, unless there's a compelling business interest, such as a bar prohibiting anyone under 18, or 21.  Fortunately, the law agrees, for the most part.
 
2014-01-22 09:51:13 AM

mistrmind: DeaH: flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.

Yes, Chik-fil-a learned they could make a tidy sum by serving cheap sandwiches to bigots who think their bigotry is religion. But B&Bs tend to cost a good bit more than a chicken sandwich. The tend to cost more than a hotel room in the area. The clientele at a B&B tend to like things like frilly or flowery rooms, antique furniture, lots of flowers, and brunch, so we're not talking about couples made up of stereotypically manly men and their obedient wives as a rule. In my experience, it's usually the wife who chooses the B&B, not the husband. And women tend to be less freaked out by gay people unless they are married to closet cases.

Of course, gay people are not a protected class the way black people are, so this man is within his legal rights to be a dick. And gay people are within their legal rights to let everyone know that the person who runs this B&B is a dick. If word gets out that the "lovely" B&B is administered by a hater, his may have no effect on his business. But I am willing to bet that it might.

Last time I checked, when you order a sandwich at Chik-fil-a, they didn't ask you about your sexual orientation, they just served you a chicken sandwich.  in a nutshell, you have your panties in a bunch because the founder has an opinion about marriage and it doesn't fit into your definition of marriage.  So, the vindictive people you are go out and try to crush the company because of someone's opinion.  Nice way to win friends and influence people, BTW.   Keep preaching that diversity and tolerance.


I think you may be confusing your bunched panties with mine. The fact is that people lined up, in a show of support of the business owner's anti-gay activities, to buy Chik-fil-A sandwiches. But a sandwich doesn't cost a lot of money. B&Bs tend to be both expensive and remarkably fussy. The clientele they attract tend to be more gay-friendly. If gay people tell gay friendly people that someone is being dickish toward them, their friends do not take it well. Is they owner free to act in a dickish manner? Certainly. Is the free market free to make decisions based on information about the business owner? Of course.

What do you want? Should the gay people involved in this just silently accept that they are being treated as lesser humans? Should their free speech be infringed upon? Should they have to tolerate being treated that way in silence? Keep preaching that freedom, brother.
 
2014-01-22 09:51:23 AM

Close2TheEdge: joness0154: Semantic Warrior: Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

You might as well be saying that private business should be able to be racist.
People said the same things about mixed race marriages only a few decades ago, that they were ungodly abominations that would invoke the wrath of god upon the entire nation. The "private business, private rules" argument suggests you believe a business owner should be allowed to refuse to do any business with couples whose skin pigmentation doesn't match identically.  Should he be allowed to refuse to do any business with a couple where one's Jewish and one's Irish?

Yes, if that's their prerogative.  Just as we are allowed to vote with our wallets and visit other businesses that will provide services to anyone.

Or get the laws changed so that the business owner can't get away with such shenanigans.


Or just allow the general public to put a place like that out of business by voting with their wallets.

Of course, I'm not a fan of too much government involvement in things they don't need to be involved in, and that's where my viewpoint comes from.
 
2014-01-22 09:52:26 AM

joness0154: DeaH: joness0154: DeaH: DGS: If he wants to run his business that way, go for it. He has that freedom. Of course, others have the freedom to make it clear to other potential customers that the individual running that establishment is a bigot because god. That may dissuade others from wanting to give him business... just as it may make others want to give him business. Something something free market something.

Would he be free to refuse black customers?

We allow restaurants to discriminate based on age (lots of restaurants banning kids, etc.), allow pharmacists with religious beliefs to refuse to dispense the morning after pill, and allow hospitals & doctors to refuse to perform abortions.

Quite frankly, I think a business owner should be free to choose who he or she does business with, even if it discriminates.  They likely won't be in business very long - allowing it to be replaced by a business that, if it wants to survive, doesn't discriminate.

So, your good with refusing black customers?

Yes, as stated above.  I would never do it, as I'm not a racist prick, but a business owner should be able to serve who he or she wants to serve.

Like I and others have said, customers are also free to take their business elsewhere, and its very likely that business won't survive.


So, you want to do away with discrimination laws and go back to separate but equal. We you alive during that period? I was.
 
2014-01-22 09:52:28 AM
I don't want the health inspector in my restaurant. If people get sick eating my food, they'll just eat somewhere else and I'll go out of business, so the free market works.
 
2014-01-22 09:54:32 AM

DeaH: mistrmind: DeaH: flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.

Yes, Chik-fil-a learned they could make a tidy sum by serving cheap sandwiches to bigots who think their bigotry is religion. But B&Bs tend to cost a good bit more than a chicken sandwich. The tend to cost more than a hotel room in the area. The clientele at a B&B tend to like things like frilly or flowery rooms, antique furniture, lots of flowers, and brunch, so we're not talking about couples made up of stereotypically manly men and their obedient wives as a rule. In my experience, it's usually the wife who chooses the B&B, not the husband. And women tend to be less freaked out by gay people unless they are married to closet cases.

Of course, gay people are not a protected class the way black people are, so this man is within his legal rights to be a dick. And gay people are within their legal rights to let everyone know that the person who runs this B&B is a dick. If word gets out that the "lovely" B&B is administered by a hater, his may have no effect on his business. But I am willing to bet that it might.

Last time I checked, when you order a sandwich at Chik-fil-a, they didn't ask you about your sexual orientation, they just served you a chicken sandwich.  in a nutshell, you have your panties in a bunch because the founder has an opinion about marriage and it doesn't fit into your definition of marriage.  So, the vindictive people you are go out and try to crush the company because of someone's opinion.  Nice way to win friends and influence people, BTW.   Keep preaching that diversity and tolerance.

I think you may be confusing your bunched panties with mine. The fact is that people lined up, in a show of support of the business owner's anti-gay activities, to buy Chik-fil-A sandwiches. But a sandwich doesn't cost a lot of money. B&Bs tend to be both expensive and remarkably fussy. The clien ...


There is a fine line between speaking up and actively going out to destroy another person's living.
 
2014-01-22 09:55:54 AM

Buttknuckle: Straights:  So the next time you stay at a B&B, think about how much buttsecks has been had on that bed and how much santorum is on the walls.


Next time you shake a guy's hand, think about how much jerking off he's done with that hand.

Next time you kiss your girlfriend...remember...oh wait...forget that one.  It'll never happen.

Next time you kiss your mom, think about the spooge sprayed on....nah....too easy.
 
2014-01-22 09:56:00 AM

Nacc: joness0154: qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?

Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

I'm as pro gay marriage as it comes, but disagree forcing these companies to do business if they don't want. I also don't understand why a couple would be adamant about giving that person business if they're adamantly against their lifestyle.

Change the source of this article to it being about black people or an interracial couple. Your defense of said bigotry still fits. Why should those racists have to do business with a couple of darkies or darkie apologists....

It's because it's wrong to discriminate. If you are a bigot you will be found and painted as the bigot you are. People should know you're a bigot so they can vote with their wallet. You have a right to be a bigot and we have a right to know so we can refuse to patronize.


This is truly amazing. A guy gets sued for turning down a gay marriage,(never intended to make a spectacle of it) and you think it's ok...no, your right...nay, your duty, to conduct a smear campaign against him and destroy his life. Yet at the same time you bleeding heart liberals are the first to line up to crucify a 12 year old kid for any sleight that can be twisted in to bullying. The stupidity the left displays in matters pertaining to an individuals right to run his business how he wants without it turning in to a witch hunt is astounding. It's like watching Nancy Grace; pure, blind, unwarranted hate that you can't put in to a rational argument. So much so that's it's to the point that deep down inside, you have to know its absurd, you have to know that you are a hypocritical douche but you are afraid that if you aren't so extreme, you will become unpopular with your PBR drinking twat waffle friends. How about you pour yourself a big glass of shut the fark up and let him run his place how he wants without fearing for his livelihood.
 
2014-01-22 09:56:22 AM

ElwoodCuse: I don't want the health inspector in my restaurant. If people get sick eating my food, they'll just eat somewhere else and I'll go out of business, so the free market works.


Are you OK with that restaurant being able to ban kids under the age of X?

Why is age discrimination by the business owner OK today but its not OK for a business owner to discriminate based on sexual orientation?
 
2014-01-22 09:56:32 AM
OK.  I don't have any strong feelings for/against gay weddings or gay anything, really.  But I'm a bit gayed-out.  It's all gay all the time.  Enough already.
 
2014-01-22 09:56:40 AM

joness0154: Or just allow the general public to put a place like that out of business by voting with their wallets.

Of course, I'm not a fan of too much government involvement in things they don't need to be involved in, and that's where my viewpoint comes from.


i1.ytimg.com
www.utne.com crooksandliars.com
www.ferris.edu

They can just vote with their wallets! By, y'know, moving to a completely different city/state/country.
 
2014-01-22 09:58:55 AM
He needs to remember that there are STRAIGHT allies of gays who MIGHT have considered getting married there. There goes any potential income. Now that this story has "gone viral" his business is all but (eventually) done. Have fun, asshole!
 
2014-01-22 09:59:01 AM

joness0154: ElwoodCuse: I don't want the health inspector in my restaurant. If people get sick eating my food, they'll just eat somewhere else and I'll go out of business, so the free market works.

Are you OK with that restaurant being able to ban kids under the age of X?

Why is age discrimination by the business owner OK today but its not OK for a business owner to discriminate based on sexual orientation?


Age is not an immutable characteristic, nor is it one exclusive to a minority - everyone has been young and everyone will be old. Furthermore, there has not been a history of invidious discrimination targeted at people based on their age. Finally, age is reasonably related to someone's ability to participate in society. Accordingly, age is not even slightly suspect as a classification, and it is fine for a business owner to say "no children".
 
2014-01-22 09:59:11 AM

Close2TheEdge: whatsupchuck: Gay couples have a right to equal access to public accommodations.  Private business owners have the right to be homophobic dickheads.  When push comes to shove in a court action to resolve this conflict, guess who almost always wins?

Hint:  There has to be a legitimate business interest for the refusal of service.

I'm not sure that's true.  The basic problem here is that while gay marriage may be legal, anti-discrimination laws against LGBT individuals are not on the books.  The business owner can't overtly discriminate and deny service based on race like putting up a "No Coloreds" sign.  But he can refuse service to gay couples, and he's legally ok to do so.  Now, what you hope is that fair minded people use the power of moral outrage to either change this guy's position or drive him out of business, but if Chick-Fil-A is any example, that won't happen.

By the way, I'm completely in favor of protests, and using every other legal means to drive him out of business.  If you are going to take that strident a stand, you better be prepared to accept and deal with the fallout as a result.


There are those of us who consider that the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment covers this. It was intended to protect skin color, though it doesn't explicitly say that, so it's easy for me to say it covers any case of who/what a person is, not just the color of their skin.

And that's the root of the problem. These religious nuts won't let go of believing that homosexuality is a choice.
 
2014-01-22 09:59:33 AM

Theaetetus: joness0154: Or just allow the general public to put a place like that out of business by voting with their wallets.

Of course, I'm not a fan of too much government involvement in things they don't need to be involved in, and that's where my viewpoint comes from.

[i1.ytimg.com image 480x360]
[www.utne.com image 200x148] [crooksandliars.com image 400x88]
[www.ferris.edu image 298x97]

They can just vote with their wallets! By, y'know, moving to a completely different city/state/country.


I never said anything close to that.

Business owners should be free to provide services to anyone they choose.
Local/State/Federal government should treat everyone equally, without discrimination.
 
2014-01-22 10:01:38 AM
Probably illegal because he runs a place of public accommodation, but no matter.

Be damned if that place ever gets a dime from us non-gay people, though. And those young engaged hetero couples looking to start life together? They're just dying to begin their wedded lives under the aegis of a doctrinaire, judgmental hotelier looking to apply his standards of right & wrong to their lives.

It's really very easy. Just make certain everyone considering his business knows this policy of his, which he appears very proud of.
 
2014-01-22 10:01:38 AM

joness0154: Theaetetus: joness0154: Or just allow the general public to put a place like that out of business by voting with their wallets.

Of course, I'm not a fan of too much government involvement in things they don't need to be involved in, and that's where my viewpoint comes from.

[i1.ytimg.com image 480x360]
[www.utne.com image 200x148] [crooksandliars.com image 400x88]
[www.ferris.edu image 298x97]

They can just vote with their wallets! By, y'know, moving to a completely different city/state/country.

I never said anything close to that.


You said it should be legal to discriminate and they should "vote with their wallets". That's actually very close to that.

Business owners should be free to provide services to anyone they choose.
Local/State/Federal government should treat everyone equally, without discrimination.


Sundown towns weren't local government acting against the interests of the town business owners... they  were the town business owners.

Go read that wiki I linked earlier on the Green Book.
 
2014-01-22 10:02:51 AM

joness0154: Why is age discrimination by the business owner OK today


I'm not sure it is. Okay, I mean. It seems to be legal; I haven't encountered any evidence that it's not. As far as I know, there have been no legal challenges of note, no major protests, and it hasn't been in the news cycles long enough for society to notice and have much of a discussion about it.
 
2014-01-22 10:07:16 AM

Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.


global3.memecdn.com
 
2014-01-22 10:07:37 AM

farkmedown: And that's the root of the problem. These religious nuts won't let go of believing that homosexuality is a choice.


Because they 'choose' to suppress their own same sex urges, maybe slipping a couple of times here and there but it's always forgiven and they're put back on the lord's righteous path, so why can't everyone just choose like that? It's a choice.
 
2014-01-22 10:07:47 AM

farkmedown: And that's the root of the problem. These religious nuts won't let go of believing that homosexuality is a choice.


It does make me wonder if bisexuality is a lot more prevalent than people assume it is. If so, they may actually be right to some very small extent; limiting one's preferences for the sake of orthodoxy might well feel like a choice.
 
2014-01-22 10:09:21 AM

Marcus Aurelius: He couldn't be hurting his business more if he advertised turd punch for breakfast.


There's a fisting enthusiast crowd that gets up that early?
 
2014-01-22 10:09:30 AM

mistrmind: DeaH: mistrmind: DeaH: flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.

Yes, Chik-fil-a learned they could make a tidy sum by serving cheap sandwiches to bigots who think their bigotry is religion. But B&Bs tend to cost a good bit more than a chicken sandwich. The tend to cost more than a hotel room in the area. The clientele at a B&B tend to like things like frilly or flowery rooms, antique furniture, lots of flowers, and brunch, so we're not talking about couples made up of stereotypically manly men and their obedient wives as a rule. In my experience, it's usually the wife who chooses the B&B, not the husband. And women tend to be less freaked out by gay people unless they are married to closet cases.

Of course, gay people are not a protected class the way black people are, so this man is within his legal rights to be a dick. And gay people are within their legal rights to let everyone know that the person who runs this B&B is a dick. If word gets out that the "lovely" B&B is administered by a hater, his may have no effect on his business. But I am willing to bet that it might.

Last time I checked, when you order a sandwich at Chik-fil-a, they didn't ask you about your sexual orientation, they just served you a chicken sandwich.  in a nutshell, you have your panties in a bunch because the founder has an opinion about marriage and it doesn't fit into your definition of marriage.  So, the vindictive people you are go out and try to crush the company because of someone's opinion.  Nice way to win friends and influence people, BTW.   Keep preaching that diversity and tolerance.

I think you may be confusing your bunched panties with mine. The fact is that people lined up, in a show of support of the business owner's anti-gay activities, to buy Chik-fil-A sandwiches. But a sandwich doesn't cost a lot of money. B&Bs tend to be both expensive and remarkably fussy. The ...


And that line is not crossed when one simply tells others how badly one is treated. And, if there is legal recourse for bad treatment, that is also allowable. No one is deciding on a whim to put someone out of business. They do not have that power. Neither speaking up nor legal action necessarily lead to someone going out of business. Part of being in business is judging your market. Chik-fil-A judged theirs correctly. It sounds as if you believe that this business owner did not judge his correctly. I certainly think he didn't. Poor judgment of ones market results in a negative impact on ones business. If that is the case, this owner will have put himself out of business.
 
2014-01-22 10:11:01 AM

Dimensio: This person's discrimination is motivated by religious belief, therefore it must be allowed. Religious belief creates special justification otherwise not present for objectionable behaviour.


A picture of some guys whose discrimination is motivated by religious belief:
floridamemory.com
 
2014-01-22 10:11:31 AM

det0321: Speaking from experience, there are worse places in the United States than Paxton, IL, although I am unable to come up with one at the moment.


Blair, NE

Barrow, AL

Anywhere in Utah

Texas
 
2014-01-22 10:11:39 AM

Gdalescrboz: Nacc: joness0154: qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?

Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

I'm as pro gay marriage as it comes, but disagree forcing these companies to do business if they don't want. I also don't understand why a couple would be adamant about giving that person business if they're adamantly against their lifestyle.

Change the source of this article to it being about black people or an interracial couple. Your defense of said bigotry still fits. Why should those racists have to do business with a couple of darkies or darkie apologists....

It's because it's wrong to discriminate. If you are a bigot you will be found and painted as the bigot you are. People should know you're a bigot so they can vote with their wallet. You have a right to be a bigot and we have a right to know so we can refuse to patronize.

This is truly amazing. A guy gets sued for turning down a gay marriage,(never intended to make a spectacle of it) and you think it's ok...no, your right...nay, your duty, to conduct a smear campaign against him and destroy his life. Yet at the same time you bleeding heart liberals are the first to line up to crucify a 12 year old kid for any sleight that can be twisted in to bullying. The stupidity the left displays in matters pertaining to an individuals right to run his business how he wants without it turning in to a witch hunt is astounding. It's like watching Nancy Grace; pure, blind, unwarranted hate that you can't put in to a rational argument. So much so that's it's to the point that deep down inside, you have to know its absurd, you have to know that you are a hypocritical douche but you are afr ...



You're just doubling down on the derp today.
 
2014-01-22 10:12:46 AM

Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.


Like the Greensboro Woolworth's, amirite?
 
2014-01-22 10:12:48 AM
Has anyone mentioned that gays have way too much taste to ever be seen in Paxton, IL in the first place?
 
2014-01-22 10:16:53 AM

rikkitikkitavi: There truly is no hate like the oppressed with a enough to finance a lawsuit.


Because filing a civil rights complaint with the government is an expensive endeavor.
 
2014-01-22 10:17:42 AM
Article fail to use "wyymhn" when referring to lesbian couple; article fails.
 
2014-01-22 10:18:23 AM
Wait-a-minute.  I thought diversity was a good thing.
 
2014-01-22 10:19:09 AM

Dr. Whoof: You know, I like these folks, people who will take a stand that is not only unpopular now, but will be judged as downright evil by future historians.  History needs its villains, and bravo for all these bigoted farks providing fodder for those thirty to forty years from now who need people to hold up as examples of real human evil. Much like the anti-civil rights folks of the 60s, and the Nazis before them, these folks are providing a valuable service, being history's douchenozzles.


You obviously don't understand the progressive mindset. In the future, something that YOU do or say today is going to get you put in the same group as the B&B owner in this story. Because progressivism is never achieved; it keeps morphing into something else in order to have continuous outrage and something new to control. Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives, so the B&B owner would be a model progressive 60 years ago. The movement will turn on you just as it turned on him.
 
2014-01-22 10:20:10 AM

Gdalescrboz: Nacc: joness0154: qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?

Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

I'm as pro gay marriage as it comes, but disagree forcing these companies to do business if they don't want. I also don't understand why a couple would be adamant about giving that person business if they're adamantly against their lifestyle.

Change the source of this article to it being about black people or an interracial couple. Your defense of said bigotry still fits. Why should those racists have to do business with a couple of darkies or darkie apologists....

It's because it's wrong to discriminate. If you are a bigot you will be found and painted as the bigot you are. People should know you're a bigot so they can vote with their wallet. You have a right to be a bigot and we have a right to know so we can refuse to patronize.

This is truly amazing. A guy gets sued for turning down a gay marriage,(never intended to make a spectacle of it) and you think it's ok...no, your right...nay, your duty, to conduct a smear campaign against him and destroy his life. Yet at the same time you bleeding heart liberals are the first to line up to crucify a 12 year old kid for any sleight that can be twisted in to bullying. The stupidity the left displays in matters pertaining to an individuals right to run his business how he wants without it turning in to a witch hunt is astounding. It's like watching Nancy Grace; pure, blind, unwarranted hate that you can't put in to a rational argument. So much so that's it's to the point that deep down inside, you have to know its absurd, you have to know that you are a hypocritical douche but you are afr ...


You long winded and insane ramblings aside, discrimination is still morally wrong. Your government made it illegal as well a long time ago.

This isn't difficult to understand. It's a very simple statement.  Discrimination is wrong.
 
2014-01-22 10:20:28 AM

rikkitikkitavi: belome: 40% of marriages are now LGBT????

I think someone really pulled a stat out of their backcrack.

I think he/she is implying that 40% of B&B business is LGBT.  Which could be very close to correct, assuming four times as many LGBT frequent B&B's than the straight community.


Wouldn't that make it 80%?
 
2014-01-22 10:23:19 AM

Penoatle: gshepnyc: Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.

I agree 100%. And I look forward to them being remembered in the not-so-distant future the same way we remember those valiant, rugged businessmen who said they would never serve blacks in their establishments.  Because we remember those people for taking a brave stand for private business, right?

Is there something similar to Godwin where instead of bringing up Nazis we bring up segregation?

"We have the right to refuse service" is different than "No Coloreds".

Again though, I could care less. Just trying to figure out the full issue to these bandwagons people hop on.


I find it almost unbelievable that you honestly think this way for real, but you don't give off troll-vibes, so I'm guessing you either don't think very hard at all or you just want to feel comfortable in your delusional worldview where anyone can just do what they want if they have a business. You are bright enough to be aware that the success of those private businesses depends greatly on federal, state and municipal services that we all support and pay for, which totally sucks your argument dry, don't you?
 
2014-01-22 10:23:43 AM
Gay marriage: because everybody has the right to freedom of association.

Anti-discrimination laws: because people don't have the right to freedom of association.

In the immortal words of the great philosopher Townshend: "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."
 
2014-01-22 10:23:43 AM
TimberCreek Bed & Breakfast. Hmmm
What does she have to say about this:
i.dailymail.co.uk
 
2014-01-22 10:24:31 AM

THE GREAT NAME: Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.


It's almost as if you hate how the Free Market has spoken!
 
2014-01-22 10:31:54 AM

THE GREAT NAME: Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.


Well, ever since desegregation we're all teh black now.
 
2014-01-22 10:35:02 AM

whatsupchuck: Gay couples have a right to equal access to public accommodations.  Private business owners have the right to be homophobic dickheads.  When push comes to shove in a court action to resolve this conflict, guess who almost always wins?

Hint:  There has to be a legitimate business interest for the refusal of service.


Is that good enough? If you run a business utilized by a lot of rednecks, you can't use the excuse that many of them will leave and negatively impact your revenue as a reason for refusing service to black people... even if it's true.
 
2014-01-22 10:37:25 AM
To everyone clutching their pearls and crying, "Smear campaign!" How, exactly, is it a smear campaign to say what really happened to you? Is anything this couple is saying untrue? Are they exaggerating? Telling the truth is not a smear campaign. Why do you want to take away someone's free speech?

The fact is that this business owner has judged that his market will not punish him for his actions. He may be right. He may be wrong. But simply telling people about the business owner's actions? That is not infringing on anyone's rights. The only infringement of rights are from the people who want to enforce silence.
 
2014-01-22 10:37:34 AM

ursomniac: Dimensio: HenryFnord: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

"No coloreds"

This circumstance is different. This person's discrimination is motivated by religious belief, therefore it must be allowed. Religious belief creates special justification otherwise not present for objectionable behaviour.

False.

This person's CLAIM is that it's motivated by religious belief, yet they seem to ONLY APPLY said belief when it comes to same-sex couples.

Otherwise, they'd refuse service to anyone who didn't share their religious beliefs: no Jews, no Muslims, no atheists, no pagans, no DIVORCED people, and so on.

The "justification" you refer to applies to not being discriminated because of your OWN religious affiliation; if you're Hindu the B&B can't deny you service because you're a Hindu.  It's not a club you can use to conveniently exclude a section of the general population from services you provide to the general population.   Of course this doesn't apply to religious organizations;  a Catholic church doesn't have to host a Hindu wedding.   But this B&B isn't a church - it just wants to be a B&B that conveniently only ever has heterosexuals present.

Plus if you gave your "justification" ANY amount of thought, you'd realize it's just a smokescreen: let's use an obvious example:

A: Evangelical B&B owner claims he has the right to deny service if it would "violate his beliefs"
B: Potential client is a Muslim who will want to pray in his rented room

Whose religious beliefs trump whose?  If A wins, then it's an obvious discrimination of B on the basis of religion which is a violation of the 14th Amendment.   If B wins, then it's (by your logic) discrimination of A on the basis of religion which is a violation of the 14th Amendment.

... at which point the universe becomes lawyers all the wa ...


So how do you resolve this paradox? There's only one solution, which is that the owner has absolute discretion. Gays, muslims etc are welcome to ban Chrisitans from their homes too. The whole "open to the public" thing is just nonsense perpetrated by thinly veiled authoritarianists.
 
2014-01-22 10:38:19 AM

DrPainMD: Dr. Whoof: You know, I like these folks, people who will take a stand that is not only unpopular now, but will be judged as downright evil by future historians.  History needs its villains, and bravo for all these bigoted farks providing fodder for those thirty to forty years from now who need people to hold up as examples of real human evil. Much like the anti-civil rights folks of the 60s, and the Nazis before them, these folks are providing a valuable service, being history's douchenozzles.

You obviously don't understand the progressive mindset. In the future, something that YOU do or say today is going to get you put in the same group as the B&B owner in this story. Because progressivism is never achieved; it keeps morphing into something else in order to have continuous outrage and something new to control. Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives, so the B&B owner would be a model progressive 60 years ago. The movement will turn on you just as it turned on him.


i.imgur.com
 
2014-01-22 10:38:36 AM

gshepnyc: Penoatle: gshepnyc: Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.

I agree 100%. And I look forward to them being remembered in the not-so-distant future the same way we remember those valiant, rugged businessmen who said they would never serve blacks in their establishments.  Because we remember those people for taking a brave stand for private business, right?

Is there something similar to Godwin where instead of bringing up Nazis we bring up segregation?

"We have the right to refuse service" is different than "No Coloreds".

Again though, I could care less. Just trying to figure out the full issue to these bandwagons people hop on.

I find it almost unbelievable that you honestly think this way for real, but you don't give off troll-vibes, so I'm guessing you either don't think very hard at all or you just want to feel comfortable in your delusional worldview where anyone can just do what they want if they have a business. You are bright enough to be aware that the success of those private businesses depends greatly on federal, state and municipal services that we all support and pay for, which totally sucks your argument dry, don't you?


Already retracted, but I appreciate you reminding me.
 
2014-01-22 10:39:45 AM

Penoatle: gshepnyc: Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.

I agree 100%. And I look forward to them being remembered in the not-so-distant future the same way we remember those valiant, rugged businessmen who said they would never serve blacks in their establishments.  Because we remember those people for taking a brave stand for private business, right?

Is there something similar to Godwin where instead of bringing up Nazis we bring up segregation?

"We have the right to refuse service" is different than "No Coloreds".

Again though, I could care less. Just trying to figure out the full issue to these bandwagons people hop on.



How much "less" do you think you can manage?
 
2014-01-22 10:40:16 AM

DrPainMD: Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives


media.tumblr.com
Wat?
 
2014-01-22 10:46:22 AM

DrPainMD: Dr. Whoof: You know, I like these folks, people who will take a stand that is not only unpopular now, but will be judged as downright evil by future historians.  History needs its villains, and bravo for all these bigoted farks providing fodder for those thirty to forty years from now who need people to hold up as examples of real human evil. Much like the anti-civil rights folks of the 60s, and the Nazis before them, these folks are providing a valuable service, being history's douchenozzles.

You obviously don't understand the progressive mindset. In the future, something that YOU do or say today is going to get you put in the same group as the B&B owner in this story. Because progressivism is never achieved; it keeps morphing into something else in order to have continuous outrage and something new to control. Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives, so the B&B owner would be a model progressive 60 years ago. The movement will turn on you just as it turned on him.


Yes. That is exactly how "progressivism" works. Progress, on the other hand, just means that more people will have rights. If you are not discriminating against people, this will not be a problem. Of course, as the song goes, "Everyone's A Little Bit Racist." Everyone holds some prejudice they may not even be aware of. What good people do is look at their prejudice and deal with it. What bad people do is pretend that God wants them to be prejudice.
 
2014-01-22 10:47:28 AM

give me doughnuts: DrPainMD: Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives

[media.tumblr.com image 500x343]
Wat?


I think it's already been posted, but forget it, he's rolling.
 
2014-01-22 10:49:04 AM

DrPainMD: Gay marriage: because everybody has the right to freedom of associationequal protection under the law.

Anti-discrimination laws: because people don't have the right to freedom of associationequal protection under the law.

In the immortal words of the great philosopher Townshend: "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."


Bigots still have the freedom to associate and spew their bigotry under the first amendment. But in the process of doing so, they cannot infringe on the right of others to equal protection. It's pretty simple.
 
2014-01-22 10:51:02 AM
Don't a lot of business in Myrtle Beach close up shop for the week during the Black Biker Rally there? I wonder when they will be forced to stay open?
 
2014-01-22 10:54:41 AM

DrPainMD: Gay marriage: because everybody has the right to freedom of association.

Anti-discrimination laws: because people don't have the right to freedom of association.

In the immortal words of the great philosopher Townshend: "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."


Is this B&B a private club? If so, then it has the right to limit who it lets in under the law. A club is a lot like a private home. Your free to invite or not invite anyone you want. Is the B&B open to the public? Well, that's a different story. Of course, at this time, gay people are not recognized as a protected class (although, ironically, business owners like the one in the article seem to be building the case that they should be). Since they are not a protected class under Illinois or Federal law, the business owner is free to decide to exclude gay people. His business judgment says his market is mainly straight people who will have no problem with hum claiming that God wants him to exclude gays. His business judgment is either right or wrong. Either way, it is only his action that will reward or punish him.

That is, unless, you think there should be a gag order on the gay couple that would take away their free speech. Is that what your saying? People should not be allowed to talk about the way a business treats them or take legal action that is available to them? Well, it sure looks like the only one want to infringe on freedom is you.
 
2014-01-22 10:54:44 AM

Billygoat Gruff: Don't a lot of business in Myrtle Beach close up shop for the week during the Black Biker Rally there? I wonder when they will be forced to stay open?


Totally different thing.  When they're closed, they're not serving anyone and therefore not discriminating.

Want to open shop for the day?  You have to cater to the entire public, not just your preferred subset.
 
2014-01-22 10:57:24 AM

flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.


I had to look into such a grand claim. According to Forbes, Dan Cathy went from #89 in 2012 on the Forbes 400 to #68 in 2013. I don't want to get into that whole mess. But I don't think that if his business had "dwindled to nearly nothing", as you say, he would have jumped 21 spots on the Forbes 400.

Try not to replace reality with your wishes.
 
2014-01-22 11:05:48 AM

Billygoat Gruff: Don't a lot of business in Myrtle Beach close up shop for the week during the Black Biker Rally there? I wonder when they will be forced to stay open?


It's amazing that you decided to come in here and pretend to be so incredibly farking stupid as to not recognize the difference between being open and refusing service to some people and being closed and not serving anyone.

Or maybe you weren't pretending.
 
2014-01-22 11:06:58 AM

DrPainMD: Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives


That's level 10 trolling right there.
 
2014-01-22 11:16:26 AM

tricycleracer: Billygoat Gruff: Don't a lot of business in Myrtle Beach close up shop for the week during the Black Biker Rally there? I wonder when they will be forced to stay open?

Totally different thing.  When they're closed, they're not serving anyone and therefore not discriminating.

Want to open shop for the day?  You have to cater to the entire public, not just your preferred subset.


I dont think it completely different. They know whats coming that week and they close up to get out of town. They apparently don't want that money. Maybe its just one of those unspoken things
 
2014-01-22 11:18:15 AM

THE GREAT NAME: Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.


t1.gstatic.com

/ Yes, not discriminating against someone is EXACTLY the same as making you be like them.
// Exactly. The. Same.
 
2014-01-22 11:19:41 AM

lenfromak: Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.

[global3.memecdn.com image 371x420]


Of course logically if someone couldn't care less they wouldn't be posting in a thread about it in the first place, so "I couldn't care less" would necessarily be a lie.
 
2014-01-22 11:19:53 AM

Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.


Exactly. If I don't want blacks or jews in my restaurant I should be able to eject them at will. And don't get me started on the DUTCH.

cockroachpeople.com
 
2014-01-22 11:20:50 AM

DrPainMD: You obviously don't understand the progressive mindset. In the future, something that YOU do or say today is going to get you put in the same group as the B&B owner in this story. Because progressivism is never achieved; it keeps morphing into something else in order to have continuous outrage and something new to control. Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives, so the B&B owner would be a model progressive 60 years ago. The movement will turn on you just as it turned on him.


www.quickmeme.com
 
2014-01-22 11:21:07 AM

DrPainMD: Dr. Whoof: You know, I like these folks, people who will take a stand that is not only unpopular now, but will be judged as downright evil by future historians.  History needs its villains, and bravo for all these bigoted farks providing fodder for those thirty to forty years from now who need people to hold up as examples of real human evil. Much like the anti-civil rights folks of the 60s, and the Nazis before them, these folks are providing a valuable service, being history's douchenozzles.

You obviously don't understand the progressive mindset. In the future, something that YOU do or say today is going to get you put in the same group as the B&B owner in this story. Because progressivism is never achieved; it keeps morphing into something else in order to have continuous outrage and something new to control. Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives, so the B&B owner would be a model progressive 60 years ago. The movement will turn on you just as it turned on him.


This is very true and I will add that things like anti-semitism, eugenics and racial supremicism *were* the progressive ideas of their day. Progressives only morphed toward other causes *after* the true consequences of those ideas became known. Just like progressives used to insist that Soviet Russia was a workable alternative to western hegemony *right up to* when the Berlin wall came down. Soon, when the foolishness of climate alarmism becomes unavoidable, those progressives will go and find something else to latch on to. As Dr Pain points out, Dr Whoof might fall foul of it. Indeed, for this reason, most progressives are miserable during the latter part of their lives.
 
2014-01-22 11:21:10 AM

THE GREAT NAME: Once they're done forcing you to marry homosexuals, they'll start forcing you to perform late term abortions. After that you'll be forced to operate the gas chambers in which they will put all the climate change deniers. And they won't even see the irony, because their brains don't work that way.


What a scary world you seem to live in. I feel sorry for you.
 
2014-01-22 11:23:58 AM

give me doughnuts: Gdalescrboz: Nacc: joness0154: qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?

Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

I'm as pro gay marriage as it comes, but disagree forcing these companies to do business if they don't want. I also don't understand why a couple would be adamant about giving that person business if they're adamantly against their lifestyle.

Change the source of this article to it being about black people or an interracial couple. Your defense of said bigotry still fits. Why should those racists have to do business with a couple of darkies or darkie apologists....

It's because it's wrong to discriminate. If you are a bigot you will be found and painted as the bigot you are. People should know you're a bigot so they can vote with their wallet. You have a right to be a bigot and we have a right to know so we can refuse to patronize.

This is truly amazing. A guy gets sued for turning down a gay marriage,(never intended to make a spectacle of it) and you think it's ok...no, your right...nay, your duty, to conduct a smear campaign against him and destroy his life. Yet at the same time you bleeding heart liberals are the first to line up to crucify a 12 year old kid for any sleight that can be twisted in to bullying. The stupidity the left displays in matters pertaining to an individuals right to run his business how he wants without it turning in to a witch hunt is astounding. It's like watching Nancy Grace; pure, blind, unwarranted hate that you can't put in to a rational argument. So much so that's it's to the point that deep down inside, you have to know its absurd, you have to know that you are a hypocritical douche but you are afr ...


You're just doubling down on the derp today.


No no I apologize, my post was having these awful stomach cramps, this was the peanutty/corn injected diharreah that ejected at high speeds, and now....silent crampless relief.
 
2014-01-22 11:29:43 AM

Princess Ryans Knickers: THE GREAT NAME: Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.

It's almost as if you hate how the Free Market has spoken!


It's not free unless it's free for consumers and producers, you silly lib.
 
2014-01-22 11:32:19 AM

THE GREAT NAME: Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.



Yes.  It's part of our sinister plan to fight global warming by turning everyone gay and thus causing the human population to dwindle.  But shhh!  Don't tell anyone!  It's a secret.

/ Came for the impotent homophobic poutrage, and I can see this thread is going to deliver.

// People at the grocery store are starting to wonder why I'm buying so much popcorn.
 
2014-01-22 11:32:37 AM

InterruptingQuirk: flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.

I had to look into such a grand claim. According to Forbes, Dan Cathy went from #89 in 2012 on the Forbes 400 to #68 in 2013. I don't want to get into that whole mess. But I don't think that if his business had "dwindled to nearly nothing", as you say, he would have jumped 21 spots on the Forbes 400.

Try not to replace reality with your wishes.


I was assuming he was being sarcastic...
 
2014-01-22 11:35:26 AM

ciberido: THE GREAT NAME: Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.


Yes.  It's part of our sinister plan to fight global warming by turning everyone gay and thus causing the human population to dwindle.  But shhh!  Don't tell anyone!  It's a secret.

/ Came for the impotent homophobic poutrage, and I can see this thread is going to deliver.

// People at the grocery store are starting to wonder why I'm buying so much popcorn.


Would you like to see where some of this paranoia started?

img.fark.net
 
2014-01-22 11:35:47 AM

Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

I don't know.  Why is "public accommodation" so hard to understand?


PenoatleI could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual craphere I am posting anyway.
 
2014-01-22 11:36:03 AM

xria: InterruptingQuirk: flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.

I had to look into such a grand claim. According to Forbes, Dan Cathy went from #89 in 2012 on the Forbes 400 to #68 in 2013. I don't want to get into that whole mess. But I don't think that if his business had "dwindled to nearly nothing", as you say, he would have jumped 21 spots on the Forbes 400.

Try not to replace reality with your wishes.

I was assuming he was being sarcastic...


I need a slashie to know.
 
2014-01-22 11:36:58 AM

skozlaw: DrPainMD: You obviously don't understand the progressive mindset. In the future, something that YOU do or say today is going to get you put in the same group as the B&B owner in this story. Because progressivism is never achieved; it keeps morphing into something else in order to have continuous outrage and something new to control. Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives, so the B&B owner would be a model progressive 60 years ago. The movement will turn on you just as it turned on him.

[www.quickmeme.com image 425x365]


Taking a crappy response and putting it as a caption on a picture of nobody in particular = still a crappy response.
 
2014-01-22 11:37:34 AM

ursomniac: Dimensio: HenryFnord: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

"No coloreds"

This circumstance is different. This person's discrimination is motivated by religious belief, therefore it must be allowed. Religious belief creates special justification otherwise not present for objectionable behaviour.

False.

This person's CLAIM is that it's motivated by religious belief, yet they seem to ONLY APPLY said belief when it comes to same-sex couples.

Otherwise, they'd refuse service to anyone who didn't share their religious beliefs: no Jews, no Muslims, no atheists, no pagans, no DIVORCED people, and so on.

The "justification" you refer to applies to not being discriminated because of your OWN religious affiliation; if you're Hindu the B&B can't deny you service because you're a Hindu.  It's not a club you can use to conveniently exclude a section of the general population from services you provide to the general population.   Of course this doesn't apply to religious organizations;  a Catholic church doesn't have to host a Hindu wedding.   But this B&B isn't a church - it just wants to be a B&B that conveniently only ever has heterosexuals present.

Plus if you gave your "justification" ANY amount of thought, you'd realize it's just a smokescreen: let's use an obvious example:

A: Evangelical B&B owner claims he has the right to deny service if it would "violate his beliefs"
B: Potential client is a Muslim who will want to pray in his rented room

Whose religious beliefs trump whose?  If A wins, then it's an obvious discrimination of B on the basis of religion which is a violation of the 14th Amendment.   If B wins, then it's (by your logic) discrimination of A on the basis of religion which is a violation of the 14th Amendment.

... at which point the universe becomes lawyers all the wa ...


Well said, and since I'm still reading through the thread it may have been said already. The bible was used as justification for slavery and segregation. All that sons of Ham stuff and there offspring being forced to serve others.
 
2014-01-22 11:37:44 AM

TV's Vinnie: THE GREAT NAME: Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.

Well, ever since desegregation we're all teh black now.


I'm just miscegenated, what with all that Nipparoon blood filling my veins. But hey, I was born that way...
 
2014-01-22 11:39:08 AM

Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?


Private business providing a public accommodation.  We went over this in the 1960s.  Why is this so hard to understand?
 
2014-01-22 11:39:45 AM

Penoatle: "We have the right to refuse service" is different than "No Coloreds".


I have to admit I'm curious what wild flights of fancy has lead you to this particular conclusion.  How exactly are they different?
 
2014-01-22 11:40:41 AM

Billygoat Gruff: Don't a lot of business in Myrtle Beach close up shop for the week during the Black Biker Rally there? I wonder when they will be forced to stay open?


They wouldn't. But, if they are open, they have to be careful not to discriminate against a protected class. For example, the B&B owner is free to close his business. If it is open, he still currently free to deny some people because they are gay (gay is not a protected class in Illinois or at the Federal level). Of course, if his market gets angry at him for denying gay people service, his business will suffer. But it will suffer because of his bad decision.

Going back to your example, if the customers of Myrtle Beach businesses no longer want to frequent those businesses because bikers are excluded, the Myrtle beach business owners may rethink their business plans vis a vis bikers. If bikers were a protected class, then the bikers would also have recourse under the law if a business was open and refused to serve them.
 
2014-01-22 11:45:32 AM

kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.


The same way white people in the 60s didn't understand why the black people could force businesses to let them sit at the lunch counter.
 
2014-01-22 11:45:35 AM

InterruptingQuirk: ciberido: THE GREAT NAME: Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.


Yes.  It's part of our sinister plan to fight global warming by turning everyone gay and thus causing the human population to dwindle.  But shhh!  Don't tell anyone!  It's a secret.

/ Came for the impotent homophobic poutrage, and I can see this thread is going to deliver.

// People at the grocery store are starting to wonder why I'm buying so much popcorn.

Would you like to see where some of this paranoia started?


img.fark.net
It's never a good idea for men to control women's reproductive abilities, no matter the politics of the man. One side seems to have learned this lesson.
 
2014-01-22 11:46:16 AM

ciberido: Penoatle: "We have the right to refuse service" is different than "No Coloreds".

I have to admit I'm curious what wild flights of fancy has lead you to this particular conclusion.  How exactly are they different?


If those two things are the same, then business owners could be prevented from refusing service to anyone for any reason, on the basis that it is (or might be) discrimination. At that point, the decision about who does business with whom is being taken by government, not individuals.

It's just another route towards stateism and the centralization of power.
 
2014-01-22 11:47:37 AM

Close2TheEdge: The basic problem here is that while gay marriage may be legal, anti-discrimination laws against LGBT individuals are not on the books.


Actually, in Illinois there ARE anti-discrimination laws on the books, just like there are in Colorado (the asshole bakery case) and in Washington state (the other asshole bakery case).
 
2014-01-22 11:49:06 AM

joness0154: qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?

Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

I'm as pro gay marriage as it comes, but disagree forcing these companies to do business if they don't want. I also don't understand why a couple would be adamant about giving that person business if they're adamantly against their lifestyle.


It isn't about going to any particular business, it's about saying it isn't permissible for public businesses to say things like "no blacks" "no gays" "no irish" "no jews" or whatever. A place of public accommodation, like a hotel doesn't get to just wing it however they want when it comes to discrimination.
 
2014-01-22 11:50:45 AM

DeaH: Vagina Boob: Sheesh.  You guys were cool as the underdog.  Now you're a bunch of oversized assholes.

I know, right? I mean black people were cool until they insisted on being served at lunch counters.


But in all fairness, the civil rights movement didn't have pretend crimes (Joe Williams, Ashley Todd) and faked rapes (Patricia Miller, Morgan Triplett) or even real crimes (Tastes Like Hate).  The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. also embraced the bible, something the gay community likes to reject.

The Civil Rights Movement just had more class and respect, definitive goals.  Meanwhile, the LGBT movement is all over the map.  It's like they're just chasing down pockets of conservatism.  The LGBT needs a charismatic leader to rope the bullshiat in.  Target gay marriage maybe?  Skip the waffle fries?


media-3.web.britannica.com

johnnycirucci.com
 
2014-01-22 11:53:37 AM

RaceBoatDriver: DeaH: Vagina Boob: Sheesh.  You guys were cool as the underdog.  Now you're a bunch of oversized assholes.

I know, right? I mean black people were cool until they insisted on being served at lunch counters.

But in all fairness, the civil rights movement didn't have pretend crimes (Joe Williams, Ashley Todd) and faked rapes (Patricia Miller, Morgan Triplett) or even real crimes (Tastes Like Hate).  The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. also embraced the bible, something the gay community likes to reject.

The Civil Rights Movement just had more class and respect, definitive goals.  Meanwhile, the LGBT movement is all over the map.  It's like they're just chasing down pockets of conservatism.  The LGBT needs a charismatic leader to rope the bullshiat in.  Target gay marriage maybe?  Skip the waffle fries?


[media-3.web.britannica.com image 391x300]

[johnnycirucci.com image 400x300]


Somebody once said something to the effect of

~"Before society can accept something they fear, they first have to laugh at it"

Wish I could remember who said and the context.
 
2014-01-22 11:56:19 AM

InterruptingQuirk: RaceBoatDriver: DeaH: Vagina Boob: Sheesh.  You guys were cool as the underdog.  Now you're a bunch of oversized assholes.

I know, right? I mean black people were cool until they insisted on being served at lunch counters.

But in all fairness, the civil rights movement didn't have pretend crimes (Joe Williams, Ashley Todd) and faked rapes (Patricia Miller, Morgan Triplett) or even real crimes (Tastes Like Hate).  The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. also embraced the bible, something the gay community likes to reject.

The Civil Rights Movement just had more class and respect, definitive goals.  Meanwhile, the LGBT movement is all over the map.  It's like they're just chasing down pockets of conservatism.  The LGBT needs a charismatic leader to rope the bullshiat in.  Target gay marriage maybe?  Skip the waffle fries?


[media-3.web.britannica.com image 391x300]

[johnnycirucci.com image 400x300]

Somebody once said something to the effect of

~"Before society can accept something they fear, they first have to laugh at it"

Wish I could remember who said and the context.


???

But if it helps, I voted against prop 8.
 
2014-01-22 11:57:37 AM

Gdalescrboz: my lip balm addiction: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

No one is forcing anyone to do anything. Just outing the bigots so they know who not to do business with.

Why are they bigots? Really, why? They think gay marriage is wrong. Gays think being against gay marriage is wrong, does that make them a bigot? I don't see where being a bigot comes on to play here


It's actually very simple. Discriminating against a protected class makes you a bigot. Not tolerating bigots does not make someone a bigot.

Do you get it yet? Probably not. It's a little too simple for even your mind.
 
2014-01-22 11:59:41 AM

flondrix: Dimensio: This person's discrimination is motivated by religious belief, therefore it must be allowed. Religious belief creates special justification otherwise not present for objectionable behaviour.

A picture of some guys whose discrimination is motivated by religious belief:
[floridamemory.com image 600x468]


That is different and does not count because reasons and furthermore.
 
2014-01-22 12:00:19 PM

THE GREAT NAME: Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.


I've said it before and I'll say it again. I bet you're a hoot at parties.
 
2014-01-22 12:04:19 PM

HenryFnord: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

"No coloreds"


Speaking of ... down here in Daytona Beach area, we naturally have a lot of bikers (Outlaws has a chapter right here that I drive by from time to time when in that area) and with bikers comes bars that cater to them.

On some of these bars they have signs that say "No Colors"... my GF (who is from up north originally) saw the sign as we drove by one and started freaking out about how bad the South is with racism, until I explained it had nothing to do with black people and explained the purpose of it and what it means.

Wonder how many people get their panties in a bunch over those signs...
 
2014-01-22 12:05:37 PM

InterruptingQuirk: ciberido: THE GREAT NAME: Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.


Yes.  It's part of our sinister plan to fight global warming by turning everyone gay and thus causing the human population to dwindle.  But shhh!  Don't tell anyone!  It's a secret.

/ Came for the impotent homophobic poutrage, and I can see this thread is going to deliver.

// People at the grocery store are starting to wonder why I'm buying so much popcorn.

Would you like to see where some of this paranoia started?

[img.fark.net image 850x656]


What's your point?  Just because an idea comes up in brainstorming and is recorded doesn't mean that the next person to speak didn't say "That's stupid and barbaric."
 
2014-01-22 12:06:16 PM
If this guy wants to change his business model and run his operation as a time share or members-only social club, he's welcome to do that... to be clear, what he wants is to get all the tax breaks of being a business (including deducting all his business expenses and other neat perks of being a business), but he doesn't want to follow any of the rules of actually being a business.
 
2014-01-22 12:08:38 PM
Hey t - h maggie!!
Missed you sat.
 
2014-01-22 12:11:52 PM
 

DrPainMD: Gay marriage: because everybody has the right to freedom of association.

Anti-discrimination laws: because people don't have the right to freedom of association.

In the immortal words of the great philosopher Townshend: "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."


God you're dumb. Didn't someone just yesterday already correct you on your false understanding of freedom of association? And you're already back today repeating the same lies as if it's groundhogs day and you can't remember being corrected.

Plonk.
 
2014-01-22 12:14:47 PM

blottoman: Hey t - h maggie!!
Missed you sat.


Yea, I was sad I missed it but I fell asleep early. Too much burning the candle at both ends.

/Wait that sound oddly sexual.
 
2014-01-22 12:16:22 PM

RaceBoatDriver: DeaH: Vagina Boob: Sheesh.  You guys were cool as the underdog.  Now you're a bunch of oversized assholes.

I know, right? I mean black people were cool until they insisted on being served at lunch counters.

But in all fairness, the civil rights movement didn't have pretend crimes (Joe Williams, Ashley Todd) and faked rapes (Patricia Miller, Morgan Triplett) or even real crimes (Tastes Like Hate).  The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. also embraced the bible, something the gay community likes to reject.

The Civil Rights Movement just had more class and respect, definitive goals.  Meanwhile, the LGBT movement is all over the map.  It's like they're just chasing down pockets of conservatism.  The LGBT needs a charismatic leader to rope the bullshiat in.  Target gay marriage maybe?  Skip the waffle fries?


[media-3.web.britannica.com image 391x300]

[johnnycirucci.com image 400x300]


It didn't really have more definitive goals, aside from just the general "equal rights"... the Civil Rights Movement included everything from inter-racial marriage to ending Jim Crow Laws to changing bus rules/laws to changing the legal status of lunch counter discrimination... I'm sure people in the period also thought the black people of the time should focus on one thing, instead of demanding equality in all protections of law.
 
2014-01-22 12:19:46 PM

justtray: DrPainMD: Gay marriage: because everybody has the right to freedom of association.

Anti-discrimination laws: because people don't have the right to freedom of association.

In the immortal words of the great philosopher Townshend: "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

God you're dumb. Didn't someone just yesterday already correct you on your false understanding of freedom of association? And you're already back today repeating the same lies as if it's groundhogs day and you can't remember being corrected.

Plonk.


One trick ponies. Just can't accept that some states have passed laws that say a public business can't discriminate against people they find icky.
 
2014-01-22 12:24:51 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: blottoman: Hey t - h maggie!!
Missed you sat.

Yea, I was sad I missed it but I fell asleep early. Too much burning the candle at both ends.

/Wait that sound oddly sexual.


Mmmmm candles... next sat sister :)
 
2014-01-22 12:25:19 PM

RaceBoatDriver: But in all fairness, the civil rights movement didn't have pretend crimes (Joe Williams, Ashley Todd) and faked rapes (Patricia Miller, Morgan Triplett) or even real crimes (Tastes Like Hate).  The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. also embraced the bible, something the gay community likes to reject.


Because the bible is really germane to the discussion of laws in a secular nation?

 Also he was a great American, a visionary leader, an amazing speaker and only an average christian.
 
2014-01-22 12:25:25 PM

Satan's Bunny Slippers: Penoatle:

Again though, I could care less. Just trying to figure out the full issue to these bandwagons people hop on.

Well then you probably SHOULD care less and stop posting.

Seriously, get your phrases correct if you're going to attempt superiority.


Between the Libertarian "I can do anything I like with my business" nonsense and the homophobia, we really had enough going on in this thread already without anyone turning into a Grammar Nazi, but what the hell.  I take it you're trying to "correct" the expression "I could care less" and trying to push the misconception that it's wrong?

Seriously, get your phrases correct if you're going to attempt superiority.
 
2014-01-22 12:25:47 PM
I thought you had to be gay in order to patronize a B&B.
 
2014-01-22 12:28:26 PM

Egoy3k: InterruptingQuirk: ciberido: THE GREAT NAME: Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.


Yes.  It's part of our sinister plan to fight global warming by turning everyone gay and thus causing the human population to dwindle.  But shhh!  Don't tell anyone!  It's a secret.

/ Came for the impotent homophobic poutrage, and I can see this thread is going to deliver.

// People at the grocery store are starting to wonder why I'm buying so much popcorn.

Would you like to see where some of this paranoia started?

[img.fark.net image 850x656]

What's your point?  Just because an idea comes up in brainstorming and is recorded doesn't mean that the next person to speak didn't say "That's stupid and barbaric."


Well, to be fair, this was a memo sent by the VP of the group to the group and which the group then published. So, it got a little beyond that.
 
2014-01-22 12:32:10 PM

THE GREAT NAME: DrPainMD: Dr. Whoof: You know, I like these folks, people who will take a stand that is not only unpopular now, but will be judged as downright evil by future historians.  History needs its villains, and bravo for all these bigoted farks providing fodder for those thirty to forty years from now who need people to hold up as examples of real human evil. Much like the anti-civil rights folks of the 60s, and the Nazis before them, these folks are providing a valuable service, being history's douchenozzles.

You obviously don't understand the progressive mindset. In the future, something that YOU do or say today is going to get you put in the same group as the B&B owner in this story. Because progressivism is never achieved; it keeps morphing into something else in order to have continuous outrage and something new to control. Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives, so the B&B owner would be a model progressive 60 years ago. The movement will turn on you just as it turned on him.

This is very true and I will add that things like anti-semitism, eugenics and racial supremicism *were* the progressive ideas of their day.

[citationneeded] Progressives only morphed toward other causes *after* the true consequences of those ideas became known. [citationneeded]  Just like progressives used to insist that Soviet Russia was a workable alternative to western hegemony *right up to* when the Berlin wall came down. [citationneeded]  Soon, when the foolishness of climate alarmism becomes unavoidable, those progressives will go and find something else to latch on to. As Dr Pain points out, Dr Whoof might fall foul of it. Indeed, for this reason, most progressives are miserable during the latter part of their lives.[citationneeded]

Sounds like something you tell around the conservative camp fire.
 
2014-01-22 12:32:32 PM

KellyX: HenryFnord: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

"No coloreds"

Speaking of ... down here in Daytona Beach area, we naturally have a lot of bikers (Outlaws has a chapter right here that I drive by from time to time when in that area) and with bikers comes bars that cater to them.

On some of these bars they have signs that say "No Colors"... my GF (who is from up north originally) saw the sign as we drove by one and started freaking out about how bad the South is with racism, until I explained it had nothing to do with black people and explained the purpose of it and what it means.

Wonder how many people get their panties in a bunch over those signs...


There are other reasons for showing colors which have nothing to do with gang affiliation.
 
2014-01-22 12:33:43 PM

InterruptingQuirk: Egoy3k: InterruptingQuirk: ciberido: THE GREAT NAME: Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.


Yes.  It's part of our sinister plan to fight global warming by turning everyone gay and thus causing the human population to dwindle.  But shhh!  Don't tell anyone!  It's a secret.

/ Came for the impotent homophobic poutrage, and I can see this thread is going to deliver.

// People at the grocery store are starting to wonder why I'm buying so much popcorn.

Would you like to see where some of this paranoia started?

[img.fark.net image 850x656]

What's your point?  Just because an idea comes up in brainstorming and is recorded doesn't mean that the next person to speak didn't say "That's stupid and barbaric."

Well, to be fair, this was a memo sent by the VP of the group to the group and which the group then published. So, it got a little beyond that.


Yes a memo detailing "Examples of proposed measures to reduce US fertility..."  so yeah once again, just because something was 'proposed' doesn't mean that it was considered a good idea.
 
2014-01-22 12:39:25 PM

Egoy3k: InterruptingQuirk: Egoy3k: InterruptingQuirk: ciberido: THE GREAT NAME: Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.


Yes.  It's part of our sinister plan to fight global warming by turning everyone gay and thus causing the human population to dwindle.  But shhh!  Don't tell anyone!  It's a secret.

/ Came for the impotent homophobic poutrage, and I can see this thread is going to deliver.

// People at the grocery store are starting to wonder why I'm buying so much popcorn.

Would you like to see where some of this paranoia started?

[img.fark.net image 850x656]

What's your point?  Just because an idea comes up in brainstorming and is recorded doesn't mean that the next person to speak didn't say "That's stupid and barbaric."

Well, to be fair, this was a memo sent by the VP of the group to the group and which the group then published. So, it got a little beyond that.

Yes a memo detailing "Examples of proposed measures to reduce US fertility..."  so yeah once again, just because something was 'proposed' doesn't mean that it was considered a good idea.


I think an objective look at the following forty years might bear out a slightly different view. I don't have a dog in this race other than some simple appreciation for differing perspectives and, as I said when I posted this in response to somebody else, this was merely lending a eye towards where people come up with the ideas they have about what some people want to achieve in this world.
 
2014-01-22 12:41:36 PM

mistrmind: Last time I checked, when you order a sandwich at Chik-fil-a, they didn't ask you about your sexual orientation, they just served you a chicken sandwich.  in a nutshell, you have your panties in a bunch because the founder has an opinion about marriage and it doesn't fit into your definition of marriage.


No, the original issue with Chik-Fil-A wasn't just Cathy's personal opinions.  It was where the money from Chik-Fil-A's sales were going: specifically, every sandwich purchased meant money going to WinShape, an umbrella organization for numerous groups opposed to gay rights in the USA.  Also at one time Chik-Fil-A was contributing to efforts to pass a bill in Uganda to make homosexuality a capital crime.

Now, that may no longer be the case: later news reports indicate Chik-Fil-A has cut ties with some of those organizations and backed down on some of their anti-gay rhetoric.  But at the time, there was a very clear financial connection between Chik-Fil-A  and efforts to have gay people executed for homosexuality, among other things.

Also, there were, and probably still are, other issues with Chik-Fil-A such as firing employees for not being Christian (or for being female).  But let's just stick to the efforts to kill gay people, shall we?

You should know this before mouthing off: it makes you look either dishonest or stupid to ignore such pertinent facts.
 
2014-01-22 12:45:19 PM
It's actually very simple. Discriminating against a protected class makes you a bigot. Not tolerating bigots does not make someone a bigot.
Do you get it yet? Probably not. It's a little too simple for even your mind


Pot, meet kettle. Your thought process is akin to a 10 year old. Bigot bigot bigot!!! Once I say that your argument is invalid!!!
 
2014-01-22 12:50:59 PM

InterruptingQuirk: KellyX: HenryFnord: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

"No coloreds"

Speaking of ... down here in Daytona Beach area, we naturally have a lot of bikers (Outlaws has a chapter right here that I drive by from time to time when in that area) and with bikers comes bars that cater to them.

On some of these bars they have signs that say "No Colors"... my GF (who is from up north originally) saw the sign as we drove by one and started freaking out about how bad the South is with racism, until I explained it had nothing to do with black people and explained the purpose of it and what it means.

Wonder how many people get their panties in a bunch over those signs...

There are other reasons for showing colors which have nothing to do with gang affiliation.


In this case, it has nothing to do with that other than they don't want different MC's fighting...
 
2014-01-22 12:56:12 PM

fariasrv: Close2TheEdge: The basic problem here is that while gay marriage may be legal, anti-discrimination laws against LGBT individuals are not on the books.

Actually, in Illinois there ARE anti-discrimination laws on the books, just like there are in Colorado (the asshole bakery case) and in Washington state (the other asshole bakery case).


mmm, baked assholes
 
2014-01-22 01:00:53 PM
To those defending this (sure you just aren't hoping to be able to use this against blacks again?):
How do you feel about the owners sending the Bible verses to the gay guys in question?
 
2014-01-22 01:01:56 PM

ciberido: mistrmind: Last time I checked, when you order a sandwich at Chik-fil-a, they didn't ask you about your sexual orientation, they just served you a chicken sandwich.  in a nutshell, you have your panties in a bunch because the founder has an opinion about marriage and it doesn't fit into your definition of marriage.

No, the original issue with Chik-Fil-A wasn't just Cathy's personal opinions.  It was where the money from Chik-Fil-A's sales were going: specifically, every sandwich purchased meant money going to WinShape, an umbrella organization for numerous groups opposed to gay rights in the USA.  Also at one time Chik-Fil-A was contributing to efforts to pass a bill in Uganda to make homosexuality a capital crime.

Now, that may no longer be the case: later news reports indicate Chik-Fil-A has cut ties with some of those organizations and backed down on some of their anti-gay rhetoric.  But at the time, there was a very clear financial connection between Chik-Fil-A  and efforts to have gay people executed for homosexuality, among other things.

Also, there were, and probably still are, other issues with Chik-Fil-A such as firing employees for not being Christian (or for being female).  But let's just stick to the efforts to kill gay people, shall we?

You should know this before mouthing off: it makes you look either dishonest or stupid to ignore such pertinent facts.


Local Chick-fil-a has servers who are female (surprise surprise) and, get this, they don't ask if you are a homosexual before serving your a chicken sandwich, which would signify that perhaps they don't really care who you are, just as long as you are buying a chicken sandwich.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
 
2014-01-22 01:20:21 PM

mistrmind: ciberido: mistrmind: Last time I checked, when you order a sandwich at Chik-fil-a, they didn't ask you about your sexual orientation, they just served you a chicken sandwich.  in a nutshell, you have your panties in a bunch because the founder has an opinion about marriage and it doesn't fit into your definition of marriage.

No, the original issue with Chik-Fil-A wasn't just Cathy's personal opinions.  It was where the money from Chik-Fil-A's sales were going: specifically, every sandwich purchased meant money going to WinShape, an umbrella organization for numerous groups opposed to gay rights in the USA.  Also at one time Chik-Fil-A was contributing to efforts to pass a bill in Uganda to make homosexuality a capital crime.

Now, that may no longer be the case: later news reports indicate Chik-Fil-A has cut ties with some of those organizations and backed down on some of their anti-gay rhetoric.  But at the time, there was a very clear financial connection between Chik-Fil-A  and efforts to have gay people executed for homosexuality, among other things.

Also, there were, and probably still are, other issues with Chik-Fil-A such as firing employees for not being Christian (or for being female).  But let's just stick to the efforts to kill gay people, shall we?

You should know this before mouthing off: it makes you look either dishonest or stupid to ignore such pertinent facts.

Local Chick-fil-a has servers who are female (surprise surprise) and, get this, they don't ask if you are a homosexual before serving your a chicken sandwich, which would signify that perhaps they don't really care who you are, just as long as you are buying a chicken sandwich.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.


It's almost as if you can have an opinion about a company based on something other than whether they server you or not.
 
2014-01-22 01:28:44 PM

RaceBoatDriver: DeaH: Vagina Boob: Sheesh.  You guys were cool as the underdog.  Now you're a bunch of oversized assholes.

I know, right? I mean black people were cool until they insisted on being served at lunch counters.

But in all fairness, the civil rights movement didn't have pretend crimes (Joe Williams, Ashley Todd) and faked rapes (Patricia Miller, Morgan Triplett) or even real crimes (Tastes Like Hate).  The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. also embraced the bible, something the gay community likes to reject.

The Civil Rights Movement just had more class and respect, definitive goals.  Meanwhile, the LGBT movement is all over the map.  It's like they're just chasing down pockets of conservatism.  The LGBT needs a charismatic leader to rope the bullshiat in.  Target gay marriage maybe?  Skip the waffle fries?


[media-3.web.britannica.com image 391x300]

[johnnycirucci.com image 400x300]


The gay rights movement has been one of the most non-violent civil rights movements that I have seen in my lifetime.  Because the gay marriage movement does not have a single identifiable leader (and Malcom X and other Civil Rights activists might want to have a word with you about your recall of history), we can feel free to infringe on the right to access public services?
 
2014-01-22 01:32:54 PM

mistrmind: ciberido: mistrmind: Last time I checked, when you order a sandwich at Chik-fil-a, they didn't ask you about your sexual orientation, they just served you a chicken sandwich.  in a nutshell, you have your panties in a bunch because the founder has an opinion about marriage and it doesn't fit into your definition of marriage.

No, the original issue with Chik-Fil-A wasn't just Cathy's personal opinions.  It was where the money from Chik-Fil-A's sales were going: specifically, every sandwich purchased meant money going to WinShape, an umbrella organization for numerous groups opposed to gay rights in the USA.  Also at one time Chik-Fil-A was contributing to efforts to pass a bill in Uganda to make homosexuality a capital crime.

Now, that may no longer be the case: later news reports indicate Chik-Fil-A has cut ties with some of those organizations and backed down on some of their anti-gay rhetoric.  But at the time, there was a very clear financial connection between Chik-Fil-A  and efforts to have gay people executed for homosexuality, among other things.

Also, there were, and probably still are, other issues with Chik-Fil-A such as firing employees for not being Christian (or for being female).  But let's just stick to the efforts to kill gay people, shall we?

You should know this before mouthing off: it makes you look either dishonest or stupid to ignore such pertinent facts.

Local Chick-fil-a has servers who are female (surprise surprise) and, get this, they don't ask if you are a homosexual before serving your a chicken sandwich, which would signify that perhaps they don't really care who you are, just as long as you are buying a chicken sandwich.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.


So, what you're saying is that Chik-fil-A, unlike the B&B, will not deny service to gay people?
 
2014-01-22 02:03:17 PM

DeaH: mistrmind: ciberido: mistrmind: Last time I checked, when you order a sandwich at Chik-fil-a, they didn't ask you about your sexual orientation, they just served you a chicken sandwich.  in a nutshell, you have your panties in a bunch because the founder has an opinion about marriage and it doesn't fit into your definition of marriage.

No, the original issue with Chik-Fil-A wasn't just Cathy's personal opinions.  It was where the money from Chik-Fil-A's sales were going: specifically, every sandwich purchased meant money going to WinShape, an umbrella organization for numerous groups opposed to gay rights in the USA.  Also at one time Chik-Fil-A was contributing to efforts to pass a bill in Uganda to make homosexuality a capital crime.

Now, that may no longer be the case: later news reports indicate Chik-Fil-A has cut ties with some of those organizations and backed down on some of their anti-gay rhetoric.  But at the time, there was a very clear financial connection between Chik-Fil-A  and efforts to have gay people executed for homosexuality, among other things.

Also, there were, and probably still are, other issues with Chik-Fil-A such as firing employees for not being Christian (or for being female).  But let's just stick to the efforts to kill gay people, shall we?

You should know this before mouthing off: it makes you look either dishonest or stupid to ignore such pertinent facts.

Local Chick-fil-a has servers who are female (surprise surprise) and, get this, they don't ask if you are a homosexual before serving your a chicken sandwich, which would signify that perhaps they don't really care who you are, just as long as you are buying a chicken sandwich.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

So, what you're saying is that Chik-fil-A, unlike the B&B, will not deny service to gay people?


Looks that way, doesn't it.  Yet the LBGT community got their collective panties in a bunch over another person's beliefs.
 
2014-01-22 02:12:32 PM

mistrmind: DeaH: mistrmind: ciberido: mistrmind: Last time I checked, when you order a sandwich at Chik-fil-a, they didn't ask you about your sexual orientation, they just served you a chicken sandwich.  in a nutshell, you have your panties in a bunch because the founder has an opinion about marriage and it doesn't fit into your definition of marriage.

No, the original issue with Chik-Fil-A wasn't just Cathy's personal opinions.  It was where the money from Chik-Fil-A's sales were going: specifically, every sandwich purchased meant money going to WinShape, an umbrella organization for numerous groups opposed to gay rights in the USA.  Also at one time Chik-Fil-A was contributing to efforts to pass a bill in Uganda to make homosexuality a capital crime.

Now, that may no longer be the case: later news reports indicate Chik-Fil-A has cut ties with some of those organizations and backed down on some of their anti-gay rhetoric.  But at the time, there was a very clear financial connection between Chik-Fil-A  and efforts to have gay people executed for homosexuality, among other things.

Also, there were, and probably still are, other issues with Chik-Fil-A such as firing employees for not being Christian (or for being female).  But let's just stick to the efforts to kill gay people, shall we?

You should know this before mouthing off: it makes you look either dishonest or stupid to ignore such pertinent facts.

Local Chick-fil-a has servers who are female (surprise surprise) and, get this, they don't ask if you are a homosexual before serving your a chicken sandwich, which would signify that perhaps they don't really care who you are, just as long as you are buying a chicken sandwich.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

So, what you're saying is that Chik-fil-A, unlike the B&B, will not deny service to gay people?

Looks that way, doesn't it.  Yet the LBGT community got their collective panties in a bunch over another person's beliefs. actions.


Spending money is an action.
 
2014-01-22 02:16:53 PM

DrPainMD: Gay marriage: because everybody has the right to freedom of association.

Anti-discrimination laws: because people don't have the right to freedom of association.

In the immortal words of the great philosopher Townshend: "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."



wwwimage.cbsnews.com
 
2014-01-22 02:21:14 PM

Egoy3k: mistrmind: DeaH: mistrmind: ciberido: mistrmind: Last time I checked, when you order a sandwich at Chik-fil-a, they didn't ask you about your sexual orientation, they just served you a chicken sandwich.  in a nutshell, you have your panties in a bunch because the founder has an opinion about marriage and it doesn't fit into your definition of marriage.

No, the original issue with Chik-Fil-A wasn't just Cathy's personal opinions.  It was where the money from Chik-Fil-A's sales were going: specifically, every sandwich purchased meant money going to WinShape, an umbrella organization for numerous groups opposed to gay rights in the USA.  Also at one time Chik-Fil-A was contributing to efforts to pass a bill in Uganda to make homosexuality a capital crime.

Now, that may no longer be the case: later news reports indicate Chik-Fil-A has cut ties with some of those organizations and backed down on some of their anti-gay rhetoric.  But at the time, there was a very clear financial connection between Chik-Fil-A  and efforts to have gay people executed for homosexuality, among other things.

Also, there were, and probably still are, other issues with Chik-Fil-A such as firing employees for not being Christian (or for being female).  But let's just stick to the efforts to kill gay people, shall we?

You should know this before mouthing off: it makes you look either dishonest or stupid to ignore such pertinent facts.

Local Chick-fil-a has servers who are female (surprise surprise) and, get this, they don't ask if you are a homosexual before serving your a chicken sandwich, which would signify that perhaps they don't really care who you are, just as long as you are buying a chicken sandwich.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

So, what you're saying is that Chik-fil-A, unlike the B&B, will not deny service to gay people?

Looks that way, doesn't it.  Yet the LBGT community got their collective panties in a bunch over another person's beliefs. actions.

Spending money is an ...


There is a different between voting with your wallet and collectively seeking out to destroy a business.   Two things the LBGTs like to do.
 
2014-01-22 02:30:42 PM

mistrmind: There is a different between voting with your wallet and collectively seeking out to destroy a business.   Two things the LBGTs like to do.


OMG, the stupid it burns.

FTFA: This isn't the first time Walder has spoken out against same-sex marriage. In 2011, Todd and Mark Wathen reportedly filed a civil rights complaint against Walder's business after he refused to host a ceremony for their civil union. As Joe. My. God. pointed out, the resolution of that complaint is still pending.

Jim Walder, owner of the TimberCreek Bed & Breakfast near Paxton, Ill., told the Post-Gazette that he will not permit LGBT couples to tie the knot at his venue even though same-sex marriage will be legally recognized in the state come June.


It was the B&B owner that went to the press.
 
2014-01-22 02:31:12 PM

mistrmind: There is a different between voting with your wallet and collectively seeking out to destroy a business.   Two things the LBGTs like to do.


Yeah there is a difference, one is more effective.  Either way nobody is coercing you or I into avoiding these businesses they are simply putting the facts out there.  We are the ones who decide.  I shop at all kinds of places that people have called for a boycott of at one time or another.  Lots of people went to Chick-Fil-A during the boycott.  Nobody forced anyone to do anything.
 
2014-01-22 02:34:38 PM

mistrmind: DeaH: mistrmind: ciberido: mistrmind: Last time I checked, when you order a sandwich at Chik-fil-a, they didn't ask you about your sexual orientation, they just served you a chicken sandwich.  in a nutshell, you have your panties in a bunch because the founder has an opinion about marriage and it doesn't fit into your definition of marriage.

No, the original issue with Chik-Fil-A wasn't just Cathy's personal opinions.  It was where the money from Chik-Fil-A's sales were going: specifically, every sandwich purchased meant money going to WinShape, an umbrella organization for numerous groups opposed to gay rights in the USA.  Also at one time Chik-Fil-A was contributing to efforts to pass a bill in Uganda to make homosexuality a capital crime.

Now, that may no longer be the case: later news reports indicate Chik-Fil-A has cut ties with some of those organizations and backed down on some of their anti-gay rhetoric.  But at the time, there was a very clear financial connection between Chik-Fil-A  and efforts to have gay people executed for homosexuality, among other things.

Also, there were, and probably still are, other issues with Chik-Fil-A such as firing employees for not being Christian (or for being female).  But let's just stick to the efforts to kill gay people, shall we?

You should know this before mouthing off: it makes you look either dishonest or stupid to ignore such pertinent facts.

Local Chick-fil-a has servers who are female (surprise surprise) and, get this, they don't ask if you are a homosexual before serving your a chicken sandwich, which would signify that perhaps they don't really care who you are, just as long as you are buying a chicken sandwich.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

So, what you're saying is that Chik-fil-A, unlike the B&B, will not deny service to gay people?

Looks that way, doesn't it.  Yet the LBGT community got their collective panties in a bunch over another person's beliefs.


In the case of Chik-fil-A, I think the LBGT community wanted to let their community know that dollars they spend at Chik-fil-A can turn into dollars used to lobby against gay rights. I know I wouldn't want to spend my money where it would be used to try to take away my rights, so I have a hard time getting mad at the LBGT community for feeling the same way about their money. My point is simply that people comparing this to the case of the B&B owner is dumb. The cases are not the same:

Case 1: Party A's money may be used against Party A in a perfectly legal way
Case 2: Party A is being denied access to a business that is supposed to be open to the public in express opposition to the law

Both cases concern Party A, but, other than that, they have nothing in common.
 
2014-01-22 02:36:20 PM

Egoy3k: mistrmind: There is a different between voting with your wallet and collectively seeking out to destroy a business.   Two things the LBGTs like to do.

Yeah there is a difference, one is more effective.  Either way nobody is coercing you or I into avoiding these businesses they are simply putting the facts out there.  We are the ones who decide.  I shop at all kinds of places that people have called for a boycott of at one time or another.  Lots of people went to Chick-Fil-A during the boycott.  Nobody forced anyone to do anything.


Keep telling yourself that and maybe it'll be true.
 
2014-01-22 02:54:05 PM

justtray: It's actually very simple. Discriminating against a protected class makes you a bigot. Not tolerating bigots does not make someone a bigot.


By that definition, everyone who complains about this B&B owner's assertion of religious rights is a bigot. Religion is the first protected class established in the US. It happened, literally, in the first clause in the First Amendment.
 
2014-01-22 02:57:43 PM

joness0154: Nogale: joness0154: qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you.  Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?

Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

I'm as pro gay marriage as it comes, but disagree forcing these companies to do business if they don't want. I also don't understand why a couple would be adamant about giving that person business if they're adamantly against their lifestyle.

They are free to refuse to do business with gay couples. Other customers are free to take their business elsewhere. Generally speaking, refusing paying customers for any reason is not a good business strategy.

Agreed 100%


So you both would like to repeal the Civil Rights Act. I see. Well, there are certain justices on the supreme court who would agree with you.

Those of us who have read the history know  that your "so reasonable" stance is wrong and cannot work. It didn't work before the Civil Rights Act and it especially won't work now that there are specific laws *against* it in a lot of places. It would be nice not to have to argue settled law and settled principles with random people just because they think history began the day they were born.

If you operate a business of public accommodation you cannot discriminate against any protected class, period. End of story.
 
2014-01-22 03:03:00 PM

gerrymander: justtray: It's actually very simple. Discriminating against a protected class makes you a bigot. Not tolerating bigots does not make someone a bigot.

By that definition, everyone who complains about this B&B owner's assertion of religious rights is a bigot. Religion is the first protected class established in the US. It happened, literally, in the first clause in the First Amendment.


You need to stay in school, specifically civics class. Your right to free religion does not give you the right to deny others their rights.

This is literally elementary civics. The fact that you do not understand it only highlights your lack of education.

Once again, being intolerent of intolerence is not bigotry. That is not an opinion, but undisputable fact. I'm sorry if you are offended by this, but if so, I strongly suggest you stop being a bigot, as that is the only solution.

As a business, with a business license, you are not allowed to discriminate based on the protected classes. If you don't like that, don't operate a business. That is your choice as a free American.
 
2014-01-22 03:03:13 PM

mistrmind: Egoy3k: mistrmind: There is a different between voting with your wallet and collectively seeking out to destroy a business.   Two things the LBGTs like to do.

Yeah there is a difference, one is more effective.  Either way nobody is coercing you or I into avoiding these businesses they are simply putting the facts out there.  We are the ones who decide.  I shop at all kinds of places that people have called for a boycott of at one time or another.  Lots of people went to Chick-Fil-A during the boycott.  Nobody forced anyone to do anything.

Keep telling yourself that and maybe it'll be true.


Who is forcing you to not buy chicken sandwiches?
 
2014-01-22 03:03:18 PM

mistrmind: There is a different between voting with your wallet and collectively seeking out to destroy a business. Two things the LBGTs like to do.


How, exactly, did the LGBT seek to destroy Chik-fil-A? Didn't just let people know what the owner was doing with the money they spent there?

And, please, list other businesses that the LGBT community is seeking to destroy. The level of difficulty is that there has to be some other method than advertising the owner's actions or by taking legal action where the owner is in clear opposition to the law.
 
2014-01-22 03:10:09 PM

gerrymander: justtray: It's actually very simple. Discriminating against a protected class makes you a bigot. Not tolerating bigots does not make someone a bigot.

By that definition, everyone who complains about this B&B owner's assertion of religious rights is a bigot. Religion is the first protected class established in the US. It happened, literally, in the first clause in the First Amendment.


Who is denying a public service to the B&B owner? Or, are you saying the B&B is a church?
 
2014-01-22 03:52:44 PM

gerrymander: justtray: It's actually very simple. Discriminating against a protected class makes you a bigot. Not tolerating bigots does not make someone a bigot.

By that definition, everyone who complains about this B&B owner's assertion of religious rights is a bigot. Religion is the first protected class established in the US. It happened, literally, in the first clause in the First Amendment.


Nobody is complaining about him because of his religion.
They're complaining about him because of his douche-baggy actions.
 
2014-01-22 04:24:52 PM

Vagina Boob: Sheesh.  You guys were cool as the underdog.  Now you're a bunch of oversized assholes.


I wonder how they got like that.
 
2014-01-22 04:29:16 PM

joness0154: ElwoodCuse: I don't want the health inspector in my restaurant. If people get sick eating my food, they'll just eat somewhere else and I'll go out of business, so the free market works.

Are you OK with that restaurant being able to ban kids under the age of X?

Why is age discrimination by the business owner OK today but its not OK for a business owner to discriminate based on sexual orientation?


Read up on immutable characteristics and then ask your question again.
 
2014-01-22 04:30:08 PM

JSTACAT: rikkitikkitavi: flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.

Uhmm, not sure if you're serious? Record revenue in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013... so, no, that didn't have the effect I think they thought it would.

/not pro-bible
//not pro-hate
///pro good chicken

Public Opinion
How does it work?

Very well, thank you.


And that's what the B&B owner is counting on, I bet.
 
2014-01-22 04:39:36 PM

Marcus Aurelius: DrPainMD: Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives

That's level 10 trolling right there.


i192.photobucket.com

Amateur.
 
2014-01-22 04:41:21 PM

mistrmind: ciberido: mistrmind: Last time I checked, when you order a sandwich at Chik-fil-a, they didn't ask you about your sexual orientation, they just served you a chicken sandwich.  in a nutshell, you have your panties in a bunch because the founder has an opinion about marriage and it doesn't fit into your definition of marriage.

No, the original issue with Chik-Fil-A wasn't just Cathy's personal opinions.  It was where the money from Chik-Fil-A's sales were going: specifically, every sandwich purchased meant money going to WinShape, an umbrella organization for numerous groups opposed to gay rights in the USA.  Also at one time Chik-Fil-A was contributing to efforts to pass a bill in Uganda to make homosexuality a capital crime.

Now, that may no longer be the case: later news reports indicate Chik-Fil-A has cut ties with some of those organizations and backed down on some of their anti-gay rhetoric.  But at the time, there was a very clear financial connection between Chik-Fil-A  and efforts to have gay people executed for homosexuality, among other things.

Also, there were, and probably still are, other issues with Chik-Fil-A such as firing employees for not being Christian (or for being female).  But let's just stick to the efforts to kill gay people, shall we?

You should know this before mouthing off: it makes you look either dishonest or stupid to ignore such pertinent facts.

Local Chick-fil-a has servers who are female (surprise surprise) and, get this, they don't ask if you are a homosexual before serving your a chicken sandwich, which would signify that perhaps they don't really care who you are, just as long as you are buying a chicken sandwich.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.


Ok, you're not being dishonest.  You really ARE this stupid.
 
2014-01-22 04:45:17 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: mistrmind: There is a different between voting with your wallet and collectively seeking out to destroy a business.   Two things the LBGTs like to do.

OMG, the stupid it burns.

FTFA: This isn't the first time Walder has spoken out against same-sex marriage. In 2011, Todd and Mark Wathen reportedly filed a civil rights complaint against Walder's business after he refused to host a ceremony for their civil union. As Joe. My. God. pointed out, the resolution of that complaint is still pending.

Jim Walder, owner of the TimberCreek Bed & Breakfast near Paxton, Ill., told the Post-Gazette that he will not permit LGBT couples to tie the knot at his venue even though same-sex marriage will be legally recognized in the state come June.

It was the B&B owner that went to the press.


Worse/better:
He did this AFTER spamming the gay couple at home with Bible verses asking that they repent their sins to avoid HELL.
 
2014-01-22 04:49:09 PM

ciberido: mistrmind: ciberido: mistrmind: Last time I checked, when you order a sandwich at Chik-fil-a, they didn't ask you about your sexual orientation, they just served you a chicken sandwich.  in a nutshell, you have your panties in a bunch because the founder has an opinion about marriage and it doesn't fit into your definition of marriage.

No, the original issue with Chik-Fil-A wasn't just Cathy's personal opinions.  It was where the money from Chik-Fil-A's sales were going: specifically, every sandwich purchased meant money going to WinShape, an umbrella organization for numerous groups opposed to gay rights in the USA.  Also at one time Chik-Fil-A was contributing to efforts to pass a bill in Uganda to make homosexuality a capital crime.

Now, that may no longer be the case: later news reports indicate Chik-Fil-A has cut ties with some of those organizations and backed down on some of their anti-gay rhetoric.  But at the time, there was a very clear financial connection between Chik-Fil-A  and efforts to have gay people executed for homosexuality, among other things.

Also, there were, and probably still are, other issues with Chik-Fil-A such as firing employees for not being Christian (or for being female).  But let's just stick to the efforts to kill gay people, shall we?

You should know this before mouthing off: it makes you look either dishonest or stupid to ignore such pertinent facts.

Local Chick-fil-a has servers who are female (surprise surprise) and, get this, they don't ask if you are a homosexual before serving your a chicken sandwich, which would signify that perhaps they don't really care who you are, just as long as you are buying a chicken sandwich.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Ok, you're not being dishonest.  You really ARE this stupid.


You're so dense, you have your own gravity.
 
2014-01-22 04:50:38 PM

Satanic_Hamster: tinfoil-hat maggie: mistrmind: There is a different between voting with your wallet and collectively seeking out to destroy a business.   Two things the LBGTs like to do.

OMG, the stupid it burns.

FTFA: This isn't the first time Walder has spoken out against same-sex marriage. In 2011, Todd and Mark Wathen reportedly filed a civil rights complaint against Walder's business after he refused to host a ceremony for their civil union. As Joe. My. God. pointed out, the resolution of that complaint is still pending.

Jim Walder, owner of the TimberCreek Bed & Breakfast near Paxton, Ill., told the Post-Gazette that he will not permit LGBT couples to tie the knot at his venue even though same-sex marriage will be legally recognized in the state come June.

It was the B&B owner that went to the press.

Worse/better:
He did this AFTER spamming the gay couple at home with Bible verses asking that they repent their sins to avoid HELL.


Yep but somehow it's the couple that are being AW's in all this.Sure...
 
2014-01-22 05:02:41 PM

Egoy3k: InterruptingQuirk: ciberido: THE GREAT NAME: Yes, because libs won't be happy until we're all teh gay.


Yes.  It's part of our sinister plan to fight global warming by turning everyone gay and thus causing the human population to dwindle.  But shhh!  Don't tell anyone!  It's a secret.

/ Came for the impotent homophobic poutrage, and I can see this thread is going to deliver.

// People at the grocery store are starting to wonder why I'm buying so much popcorn.

Would you like to see where some of this paranoia started?

[img.fark.net image 850x656]

What's your point?  Just because an idea comes up in brainstorming and is recorded doesn't mean that the next person to speak didn't say "That's stupid and barbaric."


I thought the of combating overpopulation via induced homosexuality came from The Forever War in 1974.  That's where I got it from, anyway.  I think in another Fark thread someone pointed out an earlier book that also had it as a plot element, but I can't remember which book.
 
2014-01-22 05:11:19 PM

justtray: You need to stay in school, specifically civics class. Your right to free religion does not give you the right to deny others their rights.

This is literally elementary civics. The fact that you do not understand it only highlights your lack of education.


^^^
Found the bigot.
 
2014-01-22 05:17:07 PM

gerrymander: justtray: You need to stay in school, specifically civics class. Your right to free religion does not give you the right to deny others their rights.

This is literally elementary civics. The fact that you do not understand it only highlights your lack of education.

^^^
Found the bigot.


You got me. I have an irrational hatred of stupid people. I just can't help but let ignorance and bad logic go unchecked. But I get by, one day at a time.
 
2014-01-22 06:10:17 PM
s3.amazonaws.com
 
2014-01-22 06:49:28 PM

theknuckler_33: DrPainMD: Gay marriage: because everybody has the right to freedom of associationequal protection under the law.

Anti-discrimination laws: because people don't have the right to freedom of associationequal protection under the law.

In the immortal words of the great philosopher Townshend: "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

Bigots still have the freedom to associate and spew their bigotry under the first amendment. But in the process of doing so, they cannot infringe on the right of others to equal protection. It's pretty simple.


No, if discrimination is illegal, people aren't free to associate. And sorry, but anti-discrimination laws do not get their authority from the equal protection clause, which only applies to the government (read it); they get their authority from the interstate commerce clause.
 
2014-01-22 06:50:45 PM

give me doughnuts: DrPainMD: Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives

[media.tumblr.com image 500x343]
Wat?


Ummm... does this come as a shock to you? That's right, you can thank the progressive movement for Jim Crow laws.
 
2014-01-22 06:54:16 PM

DeaH: DrPainMD: Gay marriage: because everybody has the right to freedom of association.

Anti-discrimination laws: because people don't have the right to freedom of association.

In the immortal words of the great philosopher Townshend: "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

Is this B&B a private club? If so, then it has the right to limit who it lets in under the law. A club is a lot like a private home. Your free to invite or not invite anyone you want. Is the B&B open to the public? Well, that's a different story.


It is private property. Obviously, it's not open to the public, if certain people are not allowed. The owner has the right to allow or not allow anybody he/she wants; whether or not it's a private club is irrelevant. It's private property.

That is, unless, you think there should be a gag order on the gay couple that would take away their free speech. Is that what your saying? People should not be allowed to talk about the way a business treats them or take legal action that is available to them? Well, it sure looks like the only one want to infringe on freedom is you.

Now you're just babbling.
 
2014-01-22 07:03:17 PM

justtray: DrPainMD: Gay marriage: because everybody has the right to freedom of association.

Anti-discrimination laws: because people don't have the right to freedom of association.

In the immortal words of the great philosopher Townshend: "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

God you're dumb. Didn't someone just yesterday already correct you on your false understanding of freedom of association? And you're already back today repeating the same lies as if it's groundhogs day and you can't remember being corrected.

Plonk.


There's really not that much to understand. Freedom of association is a very simple concept: your relations with others are none of the government's business. End of story. And, just because a member of the derp squad disagrees with me, it doesn't mean that I've been "corrected."
 
2014-01-22 07:05:41 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: justtray: DrPainMD: Gay marriage: because everybody has the right to freedom of association.

Anti-discrimination laws: because people don't have the right to freedom of association.

In the immortal words of the great philosopher Townshend: "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

God you're dumb. Didn't someone just yesterday already correct you on your false understanding of freedom of association? And you're already back today repeating the same lies as if it's groundhogs day and you can't remember being corrected.

Plonk.

One trick ponies. Just can't accept that some states have passed laws that say a public business can't discriminate against people they find icky.

violate the basic human right to freedom of association.

FTFY

And I get it. I understand that most people don't want rights and don't want freedom. I get it.
 
2014-01-22 07:07:23 PM

DrPainMD: DeaH: DrPainMD: Gay marriage: because everybody has the right to freedom of association.

Anti-discrimination laws: because people don't have the right to freedom of association.

In the immortal words of the great philosopher Townshend: "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

Is this B&B a private club? If so, then it has the right to limit who it lets in under the law. A club is a lot like a private home. Your free to invite or not invite anyone you want. Is the B&B open to the public? Well, that's a different story.

It is private property. Obviously, it's not open to the public, if certain people are not allowed. The owner has the right to allow or not allow anybody he/she wants; whether or not it's a private club is irrelevant. It's private property.

That is, unless, you think there should be a gag order on the gay couple that would take away their free speech. Is that what your saying? People should not be allowed to talk about the way a business treats them or take legal action that is available to them? Well, it sure looks like the only one want to infringe on freedom is you.

Now you're just babbling.


Really, your trying to say that privately owned Walmart isn't opened to the public? Restaurants are often privately owned, yet these, too, are opened to the public. A B&B is open to the public. That is the nature of the business it does. You seem to have a hard time understanding business, markets, and, well, everything.

But it is cute the way you try to label accurate extrapolations of your misunderstanding as babble. It still won't work as cover for your trying to infringe on people's First Amendment rights or their access to legal recourse. But, hey, cute counts for something. Yes, it does! It weally, weally does!
 
2014-01-22 07:49:21 PM

DrPainMD: And I get it. I understand that most people don't want rights and don't want freedom. I get it.


Oh, bless your heart. I know you were born special and your mama and daddy raised you just as best as they could.
 
2014-01-22 09:37:13 PM

Theaetetus: joness0154: Or just allow the general public to put a place like that out of business by voting with their wallets.

Of course, I'm not a fan of too much government involvement in things they don't need to be involved in, and that's where my viewpoint comes from.

[i1.ytimg.com image 480x360]
[www.utne.com image 200x148] [crooksandliars.com image 400x88]
[www.ferris.edu image 298x97]

They can just vote with their wallets! By, y'know, moving to a completely different city/state/country.


Those signs arent all the same level of discrimination.  Some are businesses and some are government.
 
2014-01-22 09:39:19 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: DrPainMD: And I get it. I understand that most people don't want rights and don't want freedom. I get it.

Oh, bless your heart. I know you were born special and your mama and daddy raised you just as best as they could.


Perhaps he should use a doll to show us where the bad meanies touched him?

I get it. Some people are uncomfortable knowing that someone has a different life they do. It eats them up inside, that some folks just don't want to live their life, because they're happy with their own, thus, EVERYONE should be. It never occurs to them, that life doesn't come in a single size, a single color, a single style, and that others may choose differently than they makes them question if their own lives are equal. And when comparing lives, they like to play the upmanship game, of MY life is obviously better than YOURS. If folks are happy with their different lives, then they can't gloat. So they come up with bullsh*t to make comparisons to. Because they NEED to compare lives. Their own is only made valid if they can be better than someone else. And if folks aren't playing that game, or worse, are living different lives, that have the quantitative differences like income level, job satisfaction AND their sex lives are different too, it makes folks mighty uncomfy, because then they feel that mebbe they've erred somewhere along the way.

It is a sort of sad way to live. Sad, because they're so worried about what other people are doing, that they miss out on stuff right under their noses.

I liken it to my lunchbreaks. Most of the guys catch a break, they have a smoke, they get a bite, and they noodle around on their phones for a bit. I tend to take my lunch at the park. I go, sit outside, and just decompress. Sometimes I just take a moment to notice the stuff around me, and get lost in it for a few. Like watching the anthills under the bench. It's calming just to slow down and sit, and just be. No noise. No rushing around. Stop and just be in nature for a few, before heading back in to see the waitstaff do their impression of five year olds melting down. My boss asked what I found so interesting at the park, and I told him, "I was watching some ants try to haul off a piece of someone's sandwich."

"For twenty minutes?" He asked.

"Yeah."

"That's just weird." And he shook his head.

Not everyone is going to do the same stuff, and worrying about what others do, that doesn't hurt anyone, or involve anyone they know is sort of sad. Because it means that folks are focusing on everything else, than the little moments. Between folks that they care about. Yes, it pisses me off when folks stick their noses where it doesn't belong, but it also makes me sad for them, because they're missing out on their own lives...
 
2014-01-22 09:50:54 PM

hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie: DrPainMD: And I get it. I understand that most people don't want rights and don't want freedom. I get it.

Oh, bless your heart. I know you were born special and your mama and daddy raised you just as best as they could.

Perhaps he should use a doll to show us where the bad meanies touched him?

I get it. Some people are uncomfortable knowing that someone has a different life they do. It eats them up inside, that some folks just don't want to live their life, because they're happy with their own, thus, EVERYONE should be. It never occurs to them, that life doesn't come in a single size, a single color, a single style, and that others may choose differently than they makes them question if their own lives are equal. And when comparing lives, they like to play the upmanship game, of MY life is obviously better than YOURS. If folks are happy with their different lives, then they can't gloat. So they come up with bullsh*t to make comparisons to. Because they NEED to compare lives. Their own is only made valid if they can be better than someone else. And if folks aren't playing that game, or worse, are living different lives, that have the quantitative differences like income level, job satisfaction AND their sex lives are different too, it makes folks mighty uncomfy, because then they feel that mebbe they've erred somewhere along the way.

It is a sort of sad way to live. Sad, because they're so worried about what other people are doing, that they miss out on stuff right under their noses.

I liken it to my lunchbreaks. Most of the guys catch a break, they have a smoke, they get a bite, and they noodle around on their phones for a bit. I tend to take my lunch at the park. I go, sit outside, and just decompress. Sometimes I just take a moment to notice the stuff around me, and get lost in it for a few. Like watching the anthills under the bench. It's calming just to slow down and sit, and just be. No noise. No rushing around. Stop and just be in natu ...

 
2014-01-22 10:05:34 PM

hubiestubert: It is a sort of sad way to live. Sad, because they're so worried about what other people are doing, that they miss out on stuff right under their noses.

I liken it to my lunchbreaks. Most of the guys catch a break, they have a smoke, they get a bite, and they noodle around on their phones for a bit. I tend to take my lunch at the park. I go, sit outside, and just decompress. Sometimes I just take a moment to notice the stuff around me, and get lost in it for a few. Like watching the anthills under the bench. It's calming just to slow down and sit, and just be. No noise. No rushing around. Stop and just be in nature for a few, before heading back in to see the waitstaff do their impression of five year olds melting down. My boss asked what I found so interesting at the park, and I told him, "I was watching some ants try to haul off a piece of someone's sandwich."


Well I meant to add some of my own comments on that whoops. Yea I try not to worry about what others are doing unless it affects me, others or is so breaking a law.

The lunch break thing sorta works, lots of people made fun of me for taking a quick nap or reading ( I so could have hooked up with my bar manager when she found me reading Tolstoy). Everyone's different, but some people really feel the need to be restrictive on the rights of others. Of course often (cough, wide stance) they are rights they also restricting it from themselves to some extent.
 
2014-01-22 10:32:53 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: Of course often (cough, wide stance) they are rights they also restricting it from themselves to some extent.


I really think this is what it comes down to most of the time. People want to have all kinds of crazy sex and they think they can't so they hate on those who can.
 
2014-01-22 10:54:59 PM

Fafai: tinfoil-hat maggie: Of course often (cough, wide stance) they are rights they also restricting it from themselves to some extent.

I really think this is what it comes down to most of the time. People want to have all kinds of crazy sex and they think they can't so they hate on those who can.


You really are proof I can misjudged a farker so much or you've mellowed, either way cool.
 
2014-01-22 11:03:46 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: Fafai: tinfoil-hat maggie: Of course often (cough, wide stance) they are rights they also restricting it from themselves to some extent.

I really think this is what it comes down to most of the time. People want to have all kinds of crazy sex and they think they can't so they hate on those who can.

You really are proof I can misjudged a farker so much or you've mellowed, either way cool.


I've had a few ups and downs in my life since joining fark (bodily injury, a near-divorce) and my mood has taken on full pendulum swings in short periods at times. I don't know how you had me pegged before--anti-feminist, probably? It all has to do with how much crazy sex I'm having at the time, and right now that's on an upswing. Life is good. But I've always been gay friendly so I hope you don't mean I mellowed on that issue.
 
2014-01-22 11:16:28 PM

Fafai: tinfoil-hat maggie: Fafai: tinfoil-hat maggie: Of course often (cough, wide stance) they are rights they also restricting it from themselves to some extent.

I really think this is what it comes down to most of the time. People want to have all kinds of crazy sex and they think they can't so they hate on those who can.

You really are proof I can misjudged a farker so much or you've mellowed, either way cool.

I've had a few ups and downs in my life since joining fark (bodily injury, a near-divorce) and my mood has taken on full pendulum swings in short periods at times. I don't know how you had me pegged before--anti-feminist, probably? It all has to do with how much crazy sex I'm having at the time, and right now that's on an upswing. Life is good. But I've always been gay friendly so I hope you don't mean I mellowed on that issue.


Truthfully I don't keep that thorough of farkies so no clue what set me off, Ihad some stuff that I was wondering about in the mish mash but well...
 
2014-01-22 11:38:02 PM
Oh. Some stuff you were wondering about in the mish mash. Now I get it.
 
2014-01-23 01:47:09 AM
I'd feel a lot better if we could just fast-forward to the time when we are required by law to suck each others' dicks and felch, fist and bugger one another.  This liberty and freedom of choice is downright disconcerting.
 
2014-01-23 01:55:43 AM

reubendaley: I'd feel a lot better if we could just fast-forward to the time when we are required by law to suck each others' dicks and felch, fist and bugger one another.


I know, right? My kids' kids are gonna have a grand old time.

/jealous
 
2014-01-23 08:49:26 AM
So, let us know how this all works out for you, Mr Walder.
 
2014-01-23 11:33:24 AM

Fafai: tinfoil-hat maggie: Fafai: tinfoil-hat maggie: Of course often (cough, wide stance) they are rights they also restricting it from themselves to some extent.

I really think this is what it comes down to most of the time. People want to have all kinds of crazy sex and they think they can't so they hate on those who can.

You really are proof I can misjudged a farker so much or you've mellowed, either way cool.

I've had a few ups and downs in my life since joining fark (bodily injury, a near-divorce) and my mood has taken on full pendulum swings in short periods at times. I don't know how you had me pegged before--anti-feminist, probably? It all has to do with how much crazy sex I'm having at the time, and right now that's on an upswing. Life is good. But I've always been gay friendly so I hope you don't mean I mellowed on that issue.


If you really want to know, I had you pegged as "friendly and gay-positive but defensive/touchy and anti-feminist", yes.

I understand you may have meant that question for Maggie rather than me, so feel free to ignore this if you don't want my opinion.
 
2014-01-23 11:42:05 AM
img.fark.net
 
2014-01-23 12:24:12 PM

R.A.Danny: [img.fark.net image 434x71]


And now, of course, I have to favorite myself as that.
 
2014-01-23 12:40:46 PM
I think we all have to come in for a big group hug.
 
2014-01-23 12:44:22 PM

gerrymander: justtray: It's actually very simple. Discriminating against a protected class makes you a bigot. Not tolerating bigots does not make someone a bigot.

By that definition, everyone who complains about this B&B owner's assertion of religious rights is a bigot. Religion is the first protected class established in the US. It happened, literally, in the first clause in the First Amendment.


I don't object to him having his relgion...  I object to him forcing his religion on everyone else, and making participation in his religious dogma a precondition of doing business. I further object to him getting tax breaks as a business of public accommodation when he does not operate as such.
 
2014-01-23 12:57:03 PM

InterruptingQuirk: xria: InterruptingQuirk: flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.

I had to look into such a grand claim. According to Forbes, Dan Cathy went from #89 in 2012 on the Forbes 400 to #68 in 2013. I don't want to get into that whole mess. But I don't think that if his business had "dwindled to nearly nothing", as you say, he would have jumped 21 spots on the Forbes 400.

Try not to replace reality with your wishes.

I was assuming he was being sarcastic...

I need a slashie to know.


I wasn't being sarcastic. Forbes magazine is wrong. Chick-Fil-A restaurants are closing left and right, when you go into one they are never crowded, and Dan Cathy is bankrupt.

You can't believe everything you read, I'm afraid.
 
2014-01-23 12:59:38 PM

flup: Dan Cathy is bankrupt.


Citation please?
 
2014-01-23 01:17:03 PM
R.A.Danny: flup: Dan Cathy is bankrupt.

Citation please?


I got nothing:

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=dan+cathy+bankrupt
 
2014-01-23 02:16:50 PM

InterruptingQuirk: flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.

I had to look into such a grand claim. According to Forbes, Dan Cathy went from #89 in 2012 on the Forbes 400 to #68 in 2013. I don't want to get into that whole mess. But I don't think that if his business had "dwindled to nearly nothing", as you say, he would have jumped 21 spots on the Forbes 400.

Try not to replace reality with your wishes.



www.action-intell.com
 
2014-01-23 02:27:47 PM

InterruptingQuirk: R.A.Danny: flup: Dan Cathy is bankrupt.

Citation please?

I got nothing:

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=dan+cathy+bankrupt


First two: Ctrl + F "bankr" No results. Wanna try again?
 
2014-01-23 05:31:14 PM

ciberido: I had you pegged


Really? Giggity.

It's times like these I'm sorry I'm a blackout drunk.
 
Displayed 289 of 289 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report