• Here is a link to the full explanation: https://rollitup.org/t/welcome-back-did-you-try-turning-it-off-and-on-again.1104810/

Straights only water fountain

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
I dont think that one person should be forced by the government to provide a good or service to another person regardless.

Barak Obama's whole administration is all about force and coercion. The Chicago way is strong in that one...

I think the courts went too far in forcing business owners to serve anyone. It should be the choice and as a result the consequence to that person's business what they choose to do.
so are you also against title II of civil rights then?
 

racerboy71

bud bootlegger
I dont think that one person should be forced by the government to provide a good or service to another person regardless.

Barak Obama's whole administration is all about force and coercion. The Chicago way is strong in that one...

I think the courts went too far in forcing business owners to serve anyone. It should be the choice and as a result the consequence to that person's business what they choose to do.
as a public business, i don't see how a business can discriminate against anyone that makes up part of the public..

if one doesn't want to sell openly to the public, imvho, they shouldn't open a public business, but rather a private club or what have you who can do as they see fit..
my $.02
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
as a public business, i don't see how a business can discriminate against anyone that makes up part of the public..

if one doesn't want to sell openly to the public, imvho, they shouldn't open a public business, but rather a private club or what have you who can do as they see fit..
my $.02
funny, the supreme court sees it the same exact way :bigjoint:
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Ever wonder why Hillary wore islamic head dress?
i do wonder why you're so intent on bringing your religious bigotry and hatred into this thread about civil rights and discrimination.

actually, no i don't. i know the answer.
 

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
funny, the supreme court sees it the same exact way :bigjoint:
And I disagree with the court as the rights of the business owner are not suddenly superseded when he starts a business. Both people are supposedly equal yet suddenly not equal as one is forced to provide a good or service to another regardless of choice.

What it is now coming down to is religion and whether the state can force people to provide goods and services that are against their beliefs.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Both people are supposedly equal yet suddenly not equal as one is forced to provide a good or service to another regardless of choice.
what in the holy world of stupid are you blathering about? no one is ever forced to start a business that is open to the public. but if you do, you have to serve the public.

it's pretty simple. simpler than servicing a dozen dudes a day.

you never answered my question: are you against title II of civil rights?
 

racerboy71

bud bootlegger
And I disagree with the court as the rights of the business owner are not suddenly superseded when he starts a business. Both people are supposedly equal yet suddenly not equal as one is forced to provide a good or service to another regardless of choice.

What it is now coming down to is religion and whether the state can force people to provide goods and services that are against their beliefs.
i asked jokingly earlier, but i'll be serious now.. exactly where in the bible does it say it's a sin to sell cakes to a gay person?
 

kpmarine

Well-Known Member
I dont think that one person should be forced by the government to provide a good or service to another person regardless.

Barak Obama's whole administration is all about force and coercion. The Chicago way is strong in that one...

I think the courts went too far in forcing business owners to serve anyone. It should be the choice and as a result the consequence to that person's business what they choose to do.
That's what happens when you're "open to the public" you can discriminate all you want as a club.
 

Beagler

Active Member
i do wonder why you're so intent on bringing your religious bigotry and hatred into this thread about civil rights and discrimination.

actually, no i don't. i know the answer.
Actually, I'm agnostic and am pointing out all religous bigotry. Not just the ones you choose to highlight.
 

racerboy71

bud bootlegger
i asked jokingly earlier, but i'll be serious now.. exactly where in the bible does it say it's a sin to sell cakes to a gay person?
i mean, if you don't like gay people, fine i guess, that's on you, don't be a gay person, but i don't understand how not liking gays or not wanting to be gay yourself forbids you from having a business transaction with that person..
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Actually, I'm agnostic and am pointing out all religous bigotry. Not just the ones you choose to highlight.
no, you're only pointing out your anti-muslim hate boner.

if that's what gets your flaccid pecker into a semi, go start a thread elsewhere.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Oh so the only case of documented bigotry on the subject happened in Oregon then.....go south.
no, there's plenty more. from the link i posted:

In December a Colorado baker was ordered by a judge to either serve gay weddings or face fines. Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, was told to “cease and desist from discriminating” against gay couples. Phillips is a Christian.


New Mexico’s Surpeme Court ruled in August that two Christian photographers who declined to photograph a same-sex union violated the state’s Human Rights Act. One justice said photographers Elaine and Jonathan Huguenin were “compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives.”


And the Washington attorney general filed a lawsuit against a florist who refused to provide flowers for a same-sex couple’s wedding. Barronelle Stutzman, the owner of Arlene’s Flowers & Gifts filed a countersuit, telling the Christian Broadcasting Network she “had to take a stand” in defense of her faith in Christ.



don't bother posting if it's only gonna showcase your ignorance.

say, do ya suppose that all the hetero couple boycotted these places, just like you claimed would happen in this day and age when you were busy arguing against title II?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
and if there's no examples of bigoted cake shops, flower shops, or photgraphers in the south, that's probably because the south is still mired in its own bigotry to the extent that they don't even allow same sex marriage, or even protection from workplace discrimination.



derp dee fucking der, twostroke. should we still go south?

:dunce:
 

jahbrudda

Well-Known Member
i mean, if you don't like gay people, fine i guess, that's on you, don't be a gay person, but i don't understand how not liking gays or not wanting to be gay yourself forbids you from having a business transaction with that person..
Refusing to sell goods or services to someone because of their sexual orientation is a fatal business decision.
I don't care for fat Greek women with mustaches, but I would rent them an apartment or sell them a house, with a smile.
 

Beagler

Active Member
no, you're only pointing out your anti-muslim hate boner.

if that's what gets your flaccid pecker into a semi, go start a thread elsewhere.
No thanks, I'm rather enjoying your nightly act of, "The Lilltle Boy Who Cried Wolf", and seeing who the wolf is tonight.

What do you take for the nightmares and bed wetting you must suffer from?
 
Top