Kim Davis's Professional Victimhood
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-12-2015, 02:42 AM
RE: Kim Davis's Professional Victimhood
(17-12-2015 01:46 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  But I'm OK if a baker refuses to use his private business to make a cake for a gay wedding.

Except that practicing such discrimination against your customers is explicitly prohibited by law. No different than refusing to serve black customers.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
18-12-2015, 04:01 AM
RE: Kim Davis's Professional Victimhood
(18-12-2015 02:42 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(17-12-2015 01:46 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  But I'm OK if a baker refuses to use his private business to make a cake for a gay wedding.

Except that practicing such discrimination against your customers is explicitly prohibited by law. No different than refusing to serve black customers.

Is it against the law? It shouldn`t be. Any privately owned business that is not a public service should have the right to refuse the service to anybody.

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2015, 04:11 AM (This post was last modified: 18-12-2015 04:15 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Kim Davis's Professional Victimhood
(18-12-2015 04:01 AM)Slowminded Wrote:  
(18-12-2015 02:42 AM)morondog Wrote:  Except that practicing such discrimination against your customers is explicitly prohibited by law. No different than refusing to serve black customers.

Is it against the law? It shouldn`t be. Any privately owned business that is not a public service should have the right to refuse the service to anybody.

Congrats, you've set back social progress by decades.

Any private business that operates publicly (i.e. offers services to the public) must do so in a nondiscriminatory way. Those are the laws, put in place to protect the public. Plus those businesses benefit from public works (like roads, police, fire departments, and infrastructure) that everyone pays for, so that's another reason why they're not allowed to discriminate. If everyone pays for the roads that FedEx relies upon to operate, it's bullshit for them to discriminate in their services.

Also, what happens when people around you refuse service to you because you're an atheist? What happens when you can't fuel up your car because no gas stations serve atheists? What happens when you lose your job because now you cannot reliably make it to work without fuel? Conversely, what happens when your employer fires you once they find out you're an atheist?

Nondiscrimination polices are put in place for a very good reasons. Atheist, being one of the most fear and vilified demographics, shouldn't be the once questioning these needed protections. Because if people could openly discriminate against us more than they already do, you know damn well they would.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like EvolutionKills's post
18-12-2015, 05:05 AM
RE: Kim Davis's Professional Victimhood
(18-12-2015 04:11 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(18-12-2015 04:01 AM)Slowminded Wrote:  Is it against the law? It shouldn`t be. Any privately owned business that is not a public service should have the right to refuse the service to anybody.

Congrats, you've set back social progress by decades.

Also, what happens when people around you refuse service to you because you're an atheist? What happens when you can't fuel up your car because no gas stations serve atheists? What happens when you lose your job because now you cannot reliably make it to work without fuel? Conversely, what happens when your employer fires you once they find out you're an atheist?

Nondiscrimination polices are put in place for a very good reasons. Atheist, being one of the most fear and vilified demographics, shouldn't be the once questioning these needed protections. Because if people could openly discriminate against us more than they already do, you know damn well they would.

And what happens if a nazi comes into the Jewish owned bakery and demands a cake with a swastika and a "Happy Auschwitz day" on it? Or a KKK member asking for cake with a depiction of a black man being hanged?
If you owned a bakery would you make such a cake?
If you owned a printing company and someone comes with a request of you printing pamphlet with racial slurs, or a picture of a twin towers collapsing with a "when infidels die, God is happy " writing. Or a picture of a child being decapitated with a sing "Sharia law is God`s will"
How about this, would you print it for the WBC, thinking "Well, I shouldn`t discriminate against their beliefs " or would you think "fuck off , fuckin` bastards"?

[Image: fkco5x.jpg]

How would you feel if you were required to print that by law?

It works both ways you know. If you don`t want your beliefs being discriminated against and refused to be serviced based on them , than you can´t discriminate against others beliefs no matter how wrong ( you think ) they are.

What you view as a social progress is actually a sward with very sharp edges on both sides , it should be wielded very carefully.

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2015, 05:07 AM
RE: Kim Davis's Professional Victimhood
(18-12-2015 04:11 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Congrats, you've set back social progress by decades.

Any private business that operates publicly (i.e. offers services to the public) must do so in a nondiscriminatory way.

I see that you edited your post and added this sentence. But please take not of my post.

Quote:Is it against the law? It shouldn`t be. Any privately owned business that is not a public service should have the right to refuse the service to anybody.

I clearly excluded public service businesses from having the right to refuse service.

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2015, 05:14 AM
RE: Kim Davis's Professional Victimhood
(17-12-2015 05:40 PM)onlinebiker Wrote:  Kim Davis, simply stated -- is a cunt.

Yup.

[Image: 4sskSsO.jpg]

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like The Organic Chemist's post
18-12-2015, 05:51 AM
RE: Kim Davis's Professional Victimhood
(18-12-2015 05:07 AM)Slowminded Wrote:  
(18-12-2015 04:11 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Congrats, you've set back social progress by decades.

Any private business that operates publicly (i.e. offers services to the public) must do so in a nondiscriminatory way.

I see that you edited your post and added this sentence. But please take not of my post.

Quote:Is it against the law? It shouldn`t be. Any privately owned business that is not a public service should have the right to refuse the service to anybody.

I clearly excluded public service businesses from having the right to refuse service.


If so, then why use the overwrought bakery counter example? Being a business that offers a public service, that kinda shoots your point in it's own foot.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2015, 05:52 AM
RE: Kim Davis's Professional Victimhood
(18-12-2015 05:05 AM)Slowminded Wrote:  
(18-12-2015 04:11 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Congrats, you've set back social progress by decades.

Also, what happens when people around you refuse service to you because you're an atheist? What happens when you can't fuel up your car because no gas stations serve atheists? What happens when you lose your job because now you cannot reliably make it to work without fuel? Conversely, what happens when your employer fires you once they find out you're an atheist?

Nondiscrimination polices are put in place for a very good reasons. Atheist, being one of the most fear and vilified demographics, shouldn't be the once questioning these needed protections. Because if people could openly discriminate against us more than they already do, you know damn well they would.

And what happens if a nazi comes into the Jewish owned bakery and demands a cake with a swastika and a "Happy Auschwitz day" on it? Or a KKK member asking for cake with a depiction of a black man being hanged?
If you owned a bakery would you make such a cake?
If you owned a printing company and someone comes with a request of you printing pamphlet with racial slurs, or a picture of a twin towers collapsing with a "when infidels die, God is happy " writing. Or a picture of a child being decapitated with a sing "Sharia law is God`s will"
How about this, would you print it for the WBC, thinking "Well, I shouldn`t discriminate against their beliefs " or would you think "fuck off , fuckin` bastards"?

[Image: fkco5x.jpg]

How would you feel if you were required to print that by law?

It works both ways you know. If you don`t want your beliefs being discriminated against and refused to be serviced based on them , than you can´t discriminate against others beliefs no matter how wrong ( you think ) they are.

What you view as a social progress is actually a sward with very sharp edges on both sides , it should be wielded very carefully.

It's an interesting debate, but AFAIK the way the law is in US at the moment, private businesses are not allowed to discriminate in offering service to the public. Only certain classes are protected from discrimination in this way - homosexuals and black people are two such classes.

The US has had several high profile cases of bakers (specifically bakers, why they are so bloody crazy about bakers I have no idea) either refusing service to gay people or gay bakers refusing to put anti-gay messages on their cakes, so yes, it very much *does* cut both ways, but I personally think that it's better to have anti-discrimination laws vs free-for-all.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
18-12-2015, 05:53 AM
RE: Kim Davis's Professional Victimhood
(18-12-2015 05:05 AM)Slowminded Wrote:  
(18-12-2015 04:11 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Congrats, you've set back social progress by decades.

Also, what happens when people around you refuse service to you because you're an atheist? What happens when you can't fuel up your car because no gas stations serve atheists? What happens when you lose your job because now you cannot reliably make it to work without fuel? Conversely, what happens when your employer fires you once they find out you're an atheist?

Nondiscrimination polices are put in place for a very good reasons. Atheist, being one of the most fear and vilified demographics, shouldn't be the once questioning these needed protections. Because if people could openly discriminate against us more than they already do, you know damn well they would.

And what happens if a nazi comes into the Jewish owned bakery and demands a cake with a swastika and a "Happy Auschwitz day" on it? Or a KKK member asking for cake with a depiction of a black man being hanged?
If you owned a bakery would you make such a cake?
If you owned a printing company and someone comes with a request of you printing pamphlet with racial slurs, or a picture of a twin towers collapsing with a "when infidels die, God is happy " writing. Or a picture of a child being decapitated with a sing "Sharia law is God`s will"
How about this, would you print it for the WBC, thinking "Well, I shouldn`t discriminate against their beliefs " or would you think "fuck off , fuckin` bastards"?

[Image: fkco5x.jpg]

How would you feel if you were required to print that by law?

It works both ways you know. If you don`t want your beliefs being discriminated against and refused to be serviced based on them , than you can´t discriminate against others beliefs no matter how wrong ( you think ) they are.

What you view as a social progress is actually a sward with very sharp edges on both sides , it should be wielded very carefully.

I already don't have to, by law.

Hate speech isn't protected under the First Amendment.

Any other questions?

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2015, 05:58 AM
RE: Kim Davis's Professional Victimhood
Also as far as I am aware, the law is kinda hard to apply - you'd have to prove that e.g. your hypothetical baker discriminated against you on the basis of your gender orientation. They *are* allowed to refuse you service, just not allowed to refuse you service if they do so with the justification that you are gay. For some reason the thought of *not* making it absolutely clear to their customers that they disapprove of their gayness doesn't seem to occur to the geniuses that regularly make the news in the US.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: