All Comments

Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Why should the business owner have to lie? The law is unnecessary since the owners authority over his business is already a fundamental law of private ownership and the free market.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Precisely! As a consumer you do not have the right to insist that every provider accommodate you. Would it have been better if the wedding cake provider had simply quoted a price that was outrageously high? I guess that could have been a different way to address the situation, but in a way that would have compromised the owners integrity. They chose not to support the morality of the potential client, that should be their right as private business owners.

    Just, likewise, do potential viewers of the AS series of movies. They do not have the right to insist that this or that be included in the movie. They only have the right to purchase or not to purchase, and to make their opinion known to others.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    this is a seriously flawed string of statements. Protect themselves from what exactly? Hurt feelings? What about the owner having to swallow his faith and being made to condone something he cannot support according to his beliefs? Reasonable people would say "You don't want my money? Screw you." They would tell all of their friends and the company would lose more money than just that person. People with an agenda, which is exactly what this is, seek to take control from the OWNER and force their will on his sovereign right to dictate the course of his investment. Whether the business owners decision is logical or pleasing to anyone else is irrelevant BECAUSE it is HIS business, HIS investment, and HIS livelihood that is at stake. This "issue" isn't about religion its about the individuals authority to dictate something he created and operates.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Not according to Merriam-Webster. Bigotry applies to "people, ideas, etc.", which pretty much includes everything.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 11 years, 2 months ago
    I live in Arizona. I see these protesters - its entirely PC generated BS. It my understanding that the word homosexual is not even in the bill. A business owner should have the right to refuse service to anyone on whatever grounds he or she sees fit. If the owner is discriminatory or a jerk people stop giving him money and he/she goes out of business. There is no need for a law but there is also a false protest afoot that makes those who really don't care begin to loath the homosexual agenda.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    harm needs to be force. This can include slander, fraud, etc. force is comprehensive. heck-I'm almost ready to go into the wedding cake business...
    point is there are plenty of options out there....big snit over forcing people to agree with you (rhetorical you).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ Maphesdus 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I'm not sure what you're saying exactly. Your statement seems rather vague. You say the laws that be apply, but we're not discussing any of "the laws that be" here. This topic is about a law which has yet to be, and in fact may very well not be, if Governor Jan Brewer makes the right decision.

    You mention something about X and Y chromosomes, which I assume means you're talking about the genetics of sex determination for some reason (though I should point out that sex is actually determined by the SRY gene specifically, and not necessarily by the Y chromosome), but frankly I don't understand why you even brought this up. How does biology has anything to do with this particular subject?

    As for the title of the topic, I just used the exact same title that MSNBC used. Are you saying that MSNBC is troll like?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -1
    Posted by $ Maphesdus 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    So individuals should have no recourse to protect themselves when a business owner decides to harm them in some way?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ Maphesdus 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The term "bigotry" only applies to a dislike of certain groups of people. It does not apply to a dislike of anything else, especially not to inanimate objects like rotten fruit or dirty hotel buildings.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    maph-one business owner's decision that is illogical, is another business person's OPPORTUNITY. seize the fabulous opportunities from dumbshits
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 2 months ago
    Of course it is prejudice. What's wrong with that? We apply prejudice all the time. Which apple to pick from the pile at the grocery store. Which person to ask on a date. Which hotel to stay at.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Bigot: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)

    I have a strong and "unfair" dislike of rotten fruit, ugly people, and seedy hotels (unfair from the perspective of the grocer, other person, and seedy hotel owner).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ stargeezer 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Since they involve interaction between same sex (as in one) the laws that be apply. You won't like that and that's ok with me since I believe there are two sexes and several decisions about how to mix them up. I've yet to hear about a chromosome that renders as anything except X or Y.

    And please, before you bombard the thread with questionable quotes from questionable sources as you have done in the past, know that I won't follow anymore of your leads - save it for someone who cares.

    I should have known better than to follow this after I saw that title and that it was from you. Another ginned up title that has very little to do with the subject. Very troll like.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ Maphesdus 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Bills are generally passed in response to problems that actually arise in the course of human interaction in society. As far as I'm aware, there has never been an issue of an LGBT business owner denying service to straight people, which wouldn't make sense to do anyway, since a majority of people are straight, and anyone who refused to let a majority of the general public purchase his products would be unlikely to remain profitable, and thus probably wouldn't stay in business very long.

    But regardless, the laws always use neutral language that applies to everyone, anyway. That is, a law which forbids discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation would apply equally to both straight and gay individuals.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I'm prejudiced against rotten fruit, ugly people, and seedy hotels. Yes, I agree that I'm bigoted against those things.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -2
    Posted by $ Maphesdus 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That's not the same thing. That's simply making a selection. Prejudice in this sense refers to bigotry.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo