"Right to Refuse Service" but not to Gays?

originally posted by: skalla

Sadly, in an overpopulated world full of idiots of all persuasions, our anarchic utopia is a pipedream.

300 million people. I'll take a police state over anarchy.

300 million people holding hands singing "Kumbaya" ----- self governing, in your pipe dream

a reply to: Annee

It's worse here, i'm a brit and we are crammed in cheek by jowl. I'm really a post apocalyptic mesolithic revivalist pipe dream holder, sigh. Yes i've been drinking.

a reply to: GetOutOfMyLight
I generally agree with UK and US equality laws but then I don't have a problem with gay people as you appear to with your ridiculous gay urine/poop fetish couple argument.

mkay, somewhere this thread took a left at the corner of wtf and wrong direction.
soooo much poopfetish and violent pope sex...

a reply to: sdcigarpig

You summed it up beautifully! And not one star (until I read it)!

A business owner can turn away an individual because they're dirty, drunk, interrupting the business, etc, but he cannot legally turn away someone because of the "GROUP" one belongs to, be it religion, gender, race or sexual orientation (in some states).

So, for an individual action? Yes, turn them away. For the group they belong to? You're liable to face a lawsuit.

originally posted by: Annee
Sexual fetish --- consenting adult partner.

Forced fetish illegal. Go to jail.

Sort of like

Gay wedding --- consenting service provider.

Gay wedding with unconsenting service provider --- send that service provider to jail or otherwise drive them out of business?

Look, I have no problem with letting gays have their ceremonies. I do have a problem when they wield a gun and force others to participate.

Would you force the black man to cater a KKK rally in the interests of equality?

a reply to: grainofsand
I make violent video games. If a gay person against guns and violent video games doesn't want to make a cake celebrating the release of one of my violent video games... they don't have to and don't have to fear me calling in the cops to force them to.

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: Annee

It's worse here, i'm a brit and we are crammed in cheek by jowl. I'm really a post apocalyptic mesolithic revivalist pipe dream holder, sigh. Yes i've been drinking.

I've been to New York

I think we should pay more attention to the Georgia Guidestones.

I can honestly state I'm happy to be near the end of my physical life then the beginning. I will teach my grand kids what I can before I go.

I already teach them "people are their heart" ---- not their color, religion, orientation, gender, size, etc etc.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Annee
Sexual fetish --- consenting adult partner.

Forced fetish illegal. Go to jail.

Sort of like

Gay wedding --- consenting service provider.

Gay wedding with unconsenting service provider --- send that service provider to jail or otherwise drive them out of business?

Look, I have no problem with letting gays have their ceremonies. I do have a problem when they wield a gun and force others to participate.

Would you force the black man to cater a KKK rally in the interests of equality?

Why not? As long as he doesn't have to make a cake with racial slurs on it

originally posted by: EyesOpenMouthShut
mkay, somewhere this thread took a left at the corner of wtf and wrong direction.
soooo much poopfetish and violent pope sex...

Violent? Nobody said anything about violent.

How do you think this comment makes people feel who don't consider their sexual attraction to urination/poop to be a fetish but to be something as innate to themselves as a person attracted to the opposite sex? Why do we get to tell them that they aren't just "born that way"? Why do we get to tell them they are "wrong direction"? Why do they have to hide it even though it's legal?

Shouldn't we all be accommodating any of them who have a desire to be out in the open upon threat of fine and prison?

a reply to: GetOutOfMyLight
Violent video games are not a sexual orientation issue.
You clearly wish to discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation.
I am glad that UK law would not allow you to do that if you set up business here.
I am a straight male.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Annee
Sexual fetish --- consenting adult partner.

Forced fetish illegal. Go to jail.

Sort of like

Gay wedding --- consenting service provider.

Gay wedding with unconsenting service provider --- send that service provider to jail or otherwise drive them out of business?

If you do weddings you do weddings. For everyone.

The service provider provides weddings.

a reply to: GetOutOfMyLight

It's fairly simple. if it doesn't effect you in any way and it isn't illegal, why care what someone does in their private life


I forgot to answer your first question.
The title of the thread is why wtf and wrong direction. but personally i'm open to discuss almost any topic

How does this injure the business owner? He provides a service or product, he sells a service or product he makes profit.

How would it injure a gay person? He needs a service or product he can't buy a service or product.

a reply to: EyesOpenMouthShut
Have I said I discriminate? Have I not said multiple times that I don't agree with discrimination on a personal level?

My entire time here... despite all the obvious efforts by certain people to cloud the issue (who know exactly that's what they are doing)... is to call attention to using the STATE itself to FORCE the issue.

I'm pointing a little further down the tracks at the hungry hungry hippo that is EAGER to get all these people absolutely dependent on it thinking they are on the happy train to prosperity and freedom... right before it switches tracks and a Fundamentalist is in charge of the government they once thought was their friend and starts gobbling them whole.

I'm trying to not evoke Godwin's Law but it's damn hard. It's a simple formula. Build up lots of government powers that give you the "right" to force people to behave the way you want... crash the economy... bring in charismatic leader promising to save everyone... flush the "dependents" and "degenerates".

I'm not the enemy here... many here just don't want to fess up that they've been helping and in fact cheering on the very monster that is eager to eat them alive in order to play out its worldwide control games.

originally posted by: ketsuko
I do have a problem when they wield a gun and force others to participate.

I think you're confusing who is offering what.

The business is offering their services to the Public. All of the public. Period. The couple is simply taking them up on their offer. Without a "Reasonable" excuse as to why they cannot accommodate them, they have no grounds for refusing them service.

They aren't being forced into anything they haven't already agreed to offer. The owners of the business chose to operate their business in that way for certain reasons. They didn't have to, but they did. They could have had a "membership only" business or a non-profit Religious business with select clients, but they didn't choose that. They chose to server "the public", all of it, equally.

Let me see . . .

business owner can't or refuses to comprehend separation of church and state ---- thereby forcing the government to make them comprehend.

Seems correct to me.

originally posted by: GetOutOfMyLight
a reply to: EyesOpenMouthShut
Have I said I discriminate? Have I not said multiple times that I don't agree with discrimination on a personal level?

My entire time here... despite all the obvious efforts by certain people to cloud the issue (who know exactly that's what they are doign)... is to call attention to using the STATE itself to FORCE the issue.

I'm pointing a little further down the tracks at the hungry hungry hippo that is EAGER to get all these people absolutely dependent on it thinking they are on the happy train to prosperity... right before it switches tracks and a Fundamentalist is in charge of the government they once thought was their friend and starts gobbling them whole.

I'm trying to not evoke Godwin's Law but it's damn hard. It's a simple formula. Build up lots of government powers to force people to behave the way you want... crash the economy... bring in charismatic leader to save everyone... flush the "dependents" and "degenerates".

I'm not the enemy here... many here just don't want to fess up that they've been helping and in fact cheering on the very monster that is eager to eat them alive in order to play out its worldwide control games.

I see where you're coming from and the best answer i can give is this.

If the government didn't step in once in a while for the right reason, civil injustice would be rampant and maybe even to the degree of dead bodies in the streets simply because someone didn't like the other.
government is a many headed beast but one of those heads is to keep us from executing each other

a reply to: LDragonFire
The only harm ever caused is from the outdated anti-gay and transgendered sentiment.
Lame, and I'm a straight male.
I shall now leave the bigots to this thread, as my previously stated and reasoned comments would only be repeated unnecessarily.
Good night.

*Edit*
I don't think you are a bigot though LDragonFire

originally posted by: EyesOpenMouthShut
I see where you're coming from and the best answer i can give is this.

And the beat goes on...