Customer Claims Religious Discrimination - Company Refuses to Print Fliers.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

I come in peace! And to say I basically agree with you

But wow. This has got to be a set up. I don't buy this for one minute. I would say Office Depot Win/Customer Big Fail, but I already read through all the comments, so I know Office Depot apologized, so they failed too.

The law might differ, but I totally support Office Depot's right to refuse service to anyone for any reason... just like I support the gay baker's right to refuse to bake a gay-hating cake and a Christian baker's right to refuse to bake a gay marriage cake. I give them credit for not refusing to let her use the self-service machines. Even if they had refused, she still had the option of finding another copy business, or just using her own copier.

In this case, the employee was following company policy... just doing his job. But even if his employer had no such police, he had every right to his freedom of conscience and to refuse to perform a service that he found unconscionable.

I don't see that she has any rights to demand anyone's service. She just has the right to ask. And it isn't religious discrimination either. First, one doesn't have to be Christian or even profess a faith to be anti-abortion; second, Office Depot rejected it for the hateful nature, not the religious nature. (Which should be her first clue that she's doing something wrong.) I wish that someone would point out to her that Office Depot probably would not have refused her service if her flyer had spoken to the plight of so many women with love and compassion and empathy, and spoken to ways her organization and/or society could alleviate and eliminate those factors, and otherwise address saving lives -- as opposed to just hating and condemning and creating more and bigger problems.

But like you and others have already said, this is part of a grander plan, using religion to keep the people distracted fighting each other, while they do their dirty deeds in the shadows.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Reallyfolks

Ok a member was denied service, it happens, can't fix stupid. You overcome that's life. But to be as brutally honest as possible, except for some segments who really cares? It happens, we all know it.

I care. And, the LGBTQ member that shared his experiences of discrimination cares. We may not be able to fix "stupid", but we can make it so the "stupid" doesn't hurt so much.

Like I said except for certain segements which you seem to fall into, who cares? No one. Not being mean, being honest. Again it's all in the approach. You can cry , whine, and be hurt and the stupid won anyway, you can laugh at the stupid, overcome, and win. Reconize those aren't the people you want to reward with your hard earned money or associate with.

a reply to: Reallyfolks

I'll take up any cause I so choose, thank you very much. In the meantime, you can keep your arm chair advice of apathy to yourself, I don't need it. If my posts bother you, don't read them.

a reply to: Boadicea

The law might differ, but I totally support Office Depot's right to refuse service to anyone for any reason... just like I support the gay baker's right to refuse to bake a gay-hating cake and a Christian baker's right to refuse to bake a gay marriage cake.

I haven't really followed your positions in other threads related to similar situations, but by the same token (that you support above) are you also in support of a business (such as a restaurant) refusing service because of a person's race, or religion, or sexual orientation, etc?

I know that some people *do* feel that businesses, as private entities (even though offering services to the public and not private club types) have the right to discriminate in those regards. The whole personal liberty thing regardless of equal rights.

Just curious..

a reply to: Boadicea

It's nice to agree.

I just wanted to reiterate the difference between the baker and this story.

If Office Depot normally prints anti-abortion literature for other customers, and a religious lady comes in sporting a crucifix and a big button that says, "I Live by the WORD", Office Depot would be guilty of discriminating if they refused to do the SAME service for her because of her religion.

That would be discrimination in the legal sense of the word.

But because they have a policy against printing certain literature because it's hateful or distasteful or whatever, it's not discrimination.

By the same token, if a baker normally makes wedding cakes for other customers, and a gay couple comes in asking for a wedding cake, the baker would be guilty of discrimination if he refused to do the SAME service for them as he does for other customers, because of their sexual orientation.

In the legal sense of the word, discrimination isn't about the PRODUCT, it's about the CUSTOMER. Discriminating and deciding not to make a certain PRODUCT is fine, but refusing to make the same product you make for other customers because of the perceived GROUP a customer belongs to, is discrimination. And that's what happened in the gake case. (that's gay cake).

a reply to: dawnstar

Thanks for posting that.

originally posted by: xuenchen
Office Depot lawyers must have feared a lawsuit.

I think you're right. With the craziness going on in the country right now, some folk can just cry "religious persecution"! and people will bend over backward (or forward) to accommodate them... And, of course, the media comes running to record it all!

Craziness! LOL!

I imagine we'll see suits of this nature in the courts for some time now... And it will eventually settle down (I hope).

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: Boadicea

In the legal sense of the word, discrimination isn't about the PRODUCT, it's about the CUSTOMER. Discriminating and deciding not to make a certain PRODUCT is fine, but refusing to make the same product you make for other customers because of the perceived GROUP a customer belongs to, is discrimination. And that's what happened in the gake case. (that's gay cake).

This.

This deserves singling out and special attention because it's the core issue.

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: Boadicea

I haven't really followed your positions in other threads related to similar situations...

That's probably just as well...

...but by the same token (that you support above) are you also in support of a business (such as a restaurant) refusing service because of a person's race, or religion, or sexual orientation, etc?

Yes, I do. Not government offices/agencies, which must treat everyone the same, but for private businesses, yes. I would much prefer using honey to vinegar. We can use the tax laws and incorporation laws to encourage and empower businesses (and their owners) to practice non-discrimination in their business. I would personally go so far as to require those businesses who choose to discriminate to proclaim it loud and proud in the name of fair business practices and full disclosure... after all, if they don't want to bake a cake for my gay niece's wedding, maybe I don't want them to bake a cake for my mother's birthday. Empower the people -- don't punish them -- and they'll do the right thing for the right reason and everybody wins. Even the haters, who are still free to hate, but no one else has to deal with them unless they want to. Reward the best and starve the worst.

I know that some people *do* feel that businesses, as private entities (even though offering services to the public and not private club types) have the right to discriminate in those regards. The whole personal liberty thing regardless of equal rights.

Just curious..

You are welcome to ask. That's why we're here, right? But back to your point, much of the reason I feel this way is because of the disaster the Civil Rights Act has been. The efforts were noble, but it has backfired in so many ways, and left so many people just as bad off, though perhaps in different ways, and only created further divisions between the people.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Reallyfolks

I'll take up any cause I so choose, thank you very much. In the meantime, you can keep your arm chair advice of apathy to yourself, I don't need it. If my posts bother you, don't read them.

Feel free and your post don't bother me. I'm sorry the realities have set you off and got you so defensive. But if you want to help it won't be done by coddling the whiners. It will be done by saying f you to the stupid, laughing at them, and going around. Seriously.

Heck I'm not even being offensive about anyone's sexual preferences but talking about dealing with it to overcome and not cry. That gets you defensive. You honestly think that approach is successful recipe to not only deal with the stupid but life in general?

Please think for a moment before replying so I can get a real answer that's not so defensive. Basically if you can't handle a conversation about the approach to dealing when it happens without getting so defensive, the stupid people you encounter are the least of your concerns.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Thank you for making that distinction -- I understand that my opinion differs from the law. I don't need the law to not discriminate, so it doesn't worry me personally, but I do understand the law doesn't agree with me -- and doesn't care!

originally posted by: Boadicea
We can use the tax laws and incorporation laws to encourage and empower businesses (and their owners) to practice non-discrimination in their business. I would personally go so far as to require those businesses who choose to discriminate to proclaim it loud and proud in the name of fair business practices and full disclosure... after all, if they don't want to bake a cake for my gay niece's wedding, maybe I don't want them to bake a cake for my mother's birthday. Empower the people -- don't punish them -- and they'll do the right thing for the right reason and everybody wins.

I have put forth very similar ideas, so I agree with you here. But incorporating that picture would entail getting a lot of people's buy-in and changing laws, etc. It's a nice idea, and if some group decided to make that all happen, I would agree with it and support it. I don't like the idea of government butting in and telling business owners who they must serve.

But under the current laws, and with the current landscape, your somewhat Utopian idea would be very hard to implement. Can you imagine the resistance from business owners who wanted to discriminate, to putting signs up that advertise that fact? And again, government shouldn't be butting in and telling business owners what signs they have to display in their glass fronts.

Of course, I DO support government regulations of cleanliness and safety for the public.

a reply to: Reallyfolks

Darth_Prime Isn't a whiner. We can see through your tactics. Insulting, disrespecting and dismissing members, like you and Metallicus have, because of who they are, and then blaming them for their poor treatment as being at fault, because they're "too public" is the epitome of bigotry and ignorance.

Boadicea has it right. If a business doesn't want to make gay cakes or deal with religious nuts fine. Have them put that out in the open. If they feel those are decisions that will be successful let us know up front and people can deciede if they want that business to receive any money . In this day and age I can see a lot of bankruptcies.

I don't believe this was any kind of religious discrimination but if she does, other businesses out there.

I will disagree though about the flyer being hateful and should have told her it was wrong. I looked at the flier, bunch of stats, a prayer and link to the under cover video group. Wasn't hateful from what I saw , I believe someone else pointed out the stats were pretty standard which even pp would agree with, so unless stats are now hateful????

originally posted by: Reallyfolks
Boadicea has it right.

Yeah, I try not to make many judgements about "right" and "wrong". My participation in these threads is about what's legal and illegal. Which, I understand, is different.

But everyone has their own idea of what is "right" and "wrong", so there's little to no chance that we all can agree on that.

a reply to: Metallicus

I was wearing a Rainbow Equality Sign shirt, Straight people can wear them too, the driver made a decision based on what they assumed was true, now i am the first to admit i am flamboyant and extreme effeminate.... do i go around with a 'i'm a homo sign' on my chest, no, but i also don't hide the fact, yes i am extremely "Homo" as some like to point out but does that give the justification to say "I don't drive F******"?

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Reallyfolks

Darth_Prime Isn't a whiner. We can see through your tactics. Insulting, disrespecting and dismissing members, like you and Metallicus have, because of who they are, and then blaming them for their poor treatment as being at fault, because they're "too public" is the epitome of bigotry and ignorance.

You can get emotional as you like and throw all the emotional keywords out you want to play on emotions to paint me anyway you want. Pretty obvious by my post they are based on dealing with the issues in a better manner than the standard crying and getting hurt and basically letting them win cause they got to you.


If you need to try to change the actual narrative because you don't like it that someone dared to say sack up and work around the stupid so be it. It's dishonest and my posts will show the real narrative. If that makes you defensive there are much bigger issues than the stupid you can't help but run into in life.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
originally posted by: Boadicea

I have put forth very similar ideas, so I agree with you here. But incorporating that picture would entail getting a lot of people's buy-in and changing laws, etc. It's a nice idea, and if some group decided to make that all happen, I would agree with it and support it. I don't like the idea of government butting in and telling business owners who they must serve.

But under the current laws, and with the current landscape, your somewhat Utopian idea would be very hard to implement.

At this point in time, yes, it would be impossible. But I am hopeful that people are ready for -- hungry for -- a new paradigm. I find hope in the popularity of Sanders and Trump... and the contempt for the status quo. People know we can do better, they just need better options. I'm actually hopeful that new ideas.... better ideas... will start getting some attention. Sanders is off to a good start.

Can you imagine the resistance from business owners who wanted to discriminate, to putting signs up that advertise that fact?

Oh how heads would explode!!! Nevertheless, sunshine is the best disinfectant.

a reply to: Reallyfolks

For the record i didn't know sharing a Story was Whining? did i Sue Uber? did i go to the Media or Social Media? No, has it happened before Yes, have i been asked to leave a store before, yes, did i call the Media? did i whine? No, have i been attacked numerous times, broken bones, hospitals? yes, have i whined about it? No.

sharing my Story and other people sharing their story so maybe we can touch some people, reach some people and show them what other people go through, the things that "No one cares about" because it wasn't them, the things where we are supposed to laugh off the "Stupid" because you can't fix it, maybe if enough people know the stories that others go through we can gain some sort of empathy towards other Humans.

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
a reply to: Reallyfolks

For the record i didn't know sharing a Story was Whining? did i Sue Uber? did i go to the Media or Social Media? No, has it happened before Yes, have i been asked to leave a store before, yes, did i call the Media? did i whine? No, have i been attacked numerous times, broken bones, hospitals? yes, have i whined about it? No.

sharing my Story and other people sharing their story so maybe we can touch some people, reach some people and show them what other people go through, the things that "No one cares about" because it wasn't them, the things where we are supposed to laugh off the "Stupid" because you can't fix it, maybe if enough people know the stories that others go through we can gain some sort of empathy towards other Humans.

No w the physical harm I am with you. No call time to scrap, time to pull out all stops. I apologize to you personally as the whining comments are what happens in general and has nothing to do with being gay. As I said this lady is a whiner as well and she as I said needs to find another business. During my debate with win, I was not making it clear no offense to you. As far as you being physically harmed. I got blasted once for this but will try it again.

Www.pinkpistols.org armed gay people aren't victims, they hand out Darwin awards.

About The Pink Pistols

“Thirty-one states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. “

a reply to: Reallyfolks

Pretty obvious by my post they are based on dealing with the issues in a better manner than the standard crying and getting hurt and basically letting them win cause they got to you.

THEY never "got to me" because you pulled the "apathy yawn, no one cares card'
You put up your "Talk to the hand".
You labled me a crying whiner, for calling out a poster who dismissed and blamed an LGBTQ member as being his fault for being to "out of the closet".

I got you. You want to stifle communication by insulting and belittling posters who challenge you easy chair apathy.