Is your establishment a 'gay bar'? The right to refuse goes both ways.

a reply to: VirusGuard

Nobody was trying to go into crazy conspiracy territory.

1: Men simply do not have the biological mechanisms necessary to house and sustain a developing fetus.
2: The "NWO" doesn't have a "plan" for gays.
3: State made test tube babies? Seriously?

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Nobody was trying to go into crazy conspiracy territory.

You think so well all i can say is try using Google

Are you saying that gay dads who think they are in the wrong body would not like to carry their own child and if so then how do you think the fusion of cells would take place ?

Sorry but i stand by my comments

a reply to: VirusGuard

You're kidding, right? That sounds like:

a reply to: VirusGuard
This is a Poe right, tell me this is a Poe?

originally posted by: Boadicea
I was actually referring to natural law and those pesky inalienable rights endowed by our Creator and enshrined in our founding documents. I should have been clear about that and I apologize for the inevitable confusion.

Of course, we all have the right to feel or be however we want. It's our right to be racist, homophobic, anti-religious or anti-Semitic. And even in business dealings, like you say, we can find legally acceptable reasons to refuse services. You're absolutely right.

Indeed, you are correct that U.S. civil law does use the color and force of law to coerce people to act against their own will and conscience. But in the end, natural law and free will always prevail -- whether it's the person allowing himself to be "bought" so to speak, or the person simply finding a legally acceptable reason to refuse service, or just no longer providing the service, or (fill in the blank).

Exactly. Is it better to tell a couple, "I'm not going to make you a cake because you're gay and I disapprove" or to lie to them, saying, "I won't be able to make the cake because I'm too busy that week"?

I think I'd rather know the truth, but it might be very embarrassing, demeaning, and humiliating to be told that truth in public... Especially after about 5 times. If the florist, bakery, wedding venue, caterer and band all tell me they're not going to work for me because I'm gay, it's going to wear on me pretty badly.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic
Not sure i follow his point. Gay is not in itself an offensive word, is the description prefered by most gay people.

You're right, it isn't. But when used as an insult, like "That's so gay!" it is meant to be derogatory. People don't say that about things they like.

a reply to: intrepid

No my super freind i am not kidding

A lot of reseach has been done and the placenter can attach to the wall of the gut and still produce a baby as it draws in blood and oxogen needed to sustain a pregnancy.

if you look then you will find a very good fake was done on the internet were a guy shows he is about eight months gone and it took a lot of time to workout it was just BS

They, as you know can clone sheep and that was 25 years ago so what do you think they can do today

this is the fake one i think

if you think that gays would not want to do this then read this

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: VirusGuard
This is a Poe right, tell me this is a Poe?

I would had sad that about a sex change about 30 years ago but if you do some reading then you will see it is possible and is on the cards so you will have to draw your own conclusions like me and then see if you connect the same dots

What does having a "sex change" have to do with being gay, lesbian or bisexual, again?

I know that conspiracy theories are often just intricate fantasies in the mind of the theoretician ... but ... just wondering here.

AND, how does that have anything to do with a business owner refusing public accommodation for ... well, anyone?

a reply to: cuckooold
Thats funny. Hey more power to them. I think its fair.

a reply to: VirusGuard

A placenter (lol, love it!) may be able to attach itself to the gut - I have some serious doubts about it, but I'm not a gynogastroenterologist so I'll keep an open mind - but where does this gut-baby develop if not in utero? The stomach? Small intestine? Maybe that darned appendix is more important than we give it credit for.

As to the "just checking, as its against some co-workers religion" cover excuse, can someone please shed some light on exactly which religion it is that has the "thou shalt not dine in a gay bar" commandment?

a reply to: Syphon

It's right after "Thou shalt not bake gay cake."

And right before "It's okay to make stuff up and claim the Bible says it."

a reply to: ScepticScot

Bill of Rights: 9th Amendment: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

Perhaps you can show me where in the Constitution the federal government has any right to tell me who I can and cannot do business with? And/or what reasons they find acceptable in my decision? Because I can't find it. The U.S. Constitution enumerates the authorized powers of the government, not the people. Even the commerce clause limits the federal government to regulating commerce between the states; NOT commerce between the people. Of course, like the rest of our founding principles, the feds have grossly overstepped their bounds in regulating commerce, including trying to tell me who I can and cannot do business with.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Bill of Rights: 9th Amendment: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

Perhaps you can show me where in the Constitution the federal government has any right to tell me who I can and cannot do business with? And/or what reasons they find acceptable in my decision? Because I can't find it. The U.S. Constitution enumerates the authorized powers of the government, not the people. Even the commerce clause limits the federal government to regulating commerce between the states; NOT commerce between the people. Of course, like the rest of our founding principles, the feds have grossly overstepped their bounds in regulating commerce, including trying to tell me who I can and cannot do business with.

a reply to: Boadicea
So as you confirm the constitution doesn't specifically protect your right to discriminate in business. You believe that you have a natural right to do so and the constitution protects these rights.
However we are not talking about your rights as an individual but what transactions you can conduct as a business.
For example the law doesn't enforce hygiene standards in your home kitchen but if you want to run a catering business it most certainly does.
Equally you have the right to be as bigoted or not as you like as an individual but not as a business.

originally posted by: stumason

originally posted by: DAVID64
It's his business, he can damn well do as he pleases with it. I think it's funny he was using "gay" as in merry or fun, not sexual preference.

No, he cannot do as "he damn well" pleases. It is against the law to discriminate on the grounds of sexuality, race, religion or age.

he can refuse to set aside a special area for straight people, he didn't refuse service.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
Is it better to tell a couple, "I'm not going to make you a cake because you're gay and I disapprove" or to lie to them, saying, "I won't be able to make the cake because I'm too busy that week"?

I think I'd rather know the truth, but it might be very embarrassing, demeaning, and humiliating to be told that truth in public... Especially after about 5 times. If the florist, bakery, wedding venue, caterer and band all tell me they're not going to work for me because I'm gay, it's going to wear on me pretty badly.

It hurts my heart just to read your words, and I didn't even hear it from a baker! Obviously, I wouldn't like either, and I doubt anyone would. Maybe a better option would be to let people discriminate as they wish, but also require them to make it public knowledge. A big fat sign on their window saying, "We refuse to bake wedding cakes for gay weddings." If they feel so strongly about it, fine; let them be loud and proud about it too.

That not only saves gay couples the pain and humiliation, because they already know they will be turned away, it also gives the business' other customers the opportunity to reconsider where they spend their hard earned money. For example, if you don't want to bake a wedding cake for my gay sister, then I don't want you to bake a birthday cake for my husband, and I am forewarned to take my business elsewhere.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Boadicea
So as you confirm the constitution doesn't specifically protect your right to discriminate in business. You believe that you have a natural right to do so and the constitution protects these rights.
However we are not talking about your rights as an individual but what transactions you can conduct as a business.
For example the law doesn't enforce hygiene standards in your home kitchen but if you want to run a catering business it most certainly does.
Equally you have the right to be as bigoted or not as you like as an individual but not as a business.

I confirmed nothing of the sort. The 9th Amendment does, specifically, protect ALL RIGHTS whether enumerated within the Constitution or not, including the right to choose who I associate with, whether in business or personal life. I'm sure you've seen restaurants and other businesses post "We reserve the RIGHT to refuse service to anyone..." signs. Indeed, if this right were not protected within the Constitution, there would be no reason for the government to create a law out of thin air to tell me who I CANNOT discriminate against.

Let's define terms: Rights -- as in natural inalienable rights endowed by our Creator, as opposed to Civil Rights codified under color and force of law -- Government granted entitlements that may and often do trample the natural rights of people.

There are those among us who would suggest even the laws requiring sanitary conditions in food preparation sites are a violation of our rights, and demand deregulation of such, citing a "free" market and "caveat emptor." I do not agree, because we are now talking about potential harm to others. If I had kids still at home, then CPS or another government agency could, in fact, bring legal action against me for a filthy kitchen, because it threatens the health and life of another person. That's a very big difference.

originally posted by: Boadicea
Perhaps you can show me where in the Constitution the federal government has any right to tell me who I can and cannot do business with?

It's not the federal government who's telling you. It's your state's laws. Each state has its own anti-discrimination laws. If you have a business operating in a state, you must follow their business laws. If I knew your state, I could point out the exact law.

Federal and State Anti-discrimination Laws - Public Accommodation

ScepticScot is correct here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

YOU, as an individual can discriminate all you like, but BUSINESSES have restrictions as to whom they can discriminate against.

originally posted by: stumason
No, he cannot do as "he damn well" pleases. It is against the law to discriminate on the grounds of sexuality, race, religion or age.

The business owner did not discriminate on those grounds. He discriminated based on his opinion that the potential customers were homophobic. See this post.