Capitalism vs. Socialism

[billvon 2,384]

>How about, "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service" or No Smoking or Turn Off Cell
>Phones. Aren't those behavioral issues?

Now that's actually a reasonable question!

Shirt-shoes are health issues, as is smoking. Protection of public health overrides concerns over equal access. (And if a religion ever starts that requires ritual urination in public, public health will override that as well - although of course there will be a fight.)

"Turn off cell phone" is merely a demand that someone makes of a customer, and thus does not deny anyone service. Similar to "keep control of your kids." If a store put up a sign that said "this store does not serve anyone who carries a powered-on cellphone" then you'd have a good argument that they were denying service to specific groups of people. It would likely still be legal since cellphone users are not a protected class - a class that has, in the past, been regularly denied service for reasons unrelated to public health. But if it became a widespread thing then you might see an argument that cellphone users should be a protected class. (Would be a hard argument to make, but someone still might try to make it.)

[DanG 1]

Quote

How about, "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service" or No Smoking or Turn Off Cell Phones. Aren't those behavioral issues?

Those are behaviors that people exhibit while in the store. You can exclude people based on that sort of thing all day long.

Coreece says they can ban gays because being gay is a behavior. Do you agree? If so, on what behaviors would a store base discrimination against gay people?

- Dan G

[turtlespeed 212]

billvon

>How about, "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service" or No Smoking or Turn Off Cell
>Phones. Aren't those behavioral issues?

Now that's actually a reasonable question!

Shirt-shoes are health issues, as is smoking. Protection of public health overrides concerns over equal access. (And if a religion ever starts that requires ritual urination in public, public health will override that as well - although of course there will be a fight.)

"Turn off cell phone" is merely a demand that someone makes of a customer, and thus does not deny anyone service. Similar to "keep control of your kids." If a store put up a sign that said "this store does not serve anyone who carries a powered-on cellphone" then you'd have a good argument that they were denying service to specific groups of people. It would likely still be legal since cellphone users are not a protected class - a class that has, in the past, been regularly denied service for reasons unrelated to public health. But if it became a widespread thing then you might see an argument that cellphone users should be a protected class. (Would be a hard argument to make, but someone still might try to make it.)

Health issues . . . So, a grimy, unwashed, diseased, sick, coughing, homeless woman should be refused service because she is a public health risk.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[DanG 1]

Quote

So, a grimy, unwashed, diseased, sick, coughing, homeless woman should be refused service because she is a public health risk.

Whether she "should" be refused service is up to the business owner. She "could" legally be denied service at a private business.

- Dan G

[tkhayes 124]

Actually I would object, but that is because it is my business and I am not in the business of running or even hosting church services. But for the right cause, I might. We host a lot of different things. I am in the skydiving business. And the 'cake baker' is in the business making cakes. Also, they not in the business of running church services, just like me.

No one is asking the cake baker to watch or engage people having gay sex, or even attend their gay marriage. The cake baker is denying their primary product and/or service based on a discrimination. A discrimination of something now ruled on by the Supreme Court as lawful.

But we are not actually talking about church services or baking cakes. We are talking about religion and discrimination.

And that is laid out in the Constitution. I can choose or not choose religion. And now that the Supreme Court has ruled on the issue of gay marriage that is also now 'in the constitution'. Whether you like it or not.

Just like discriminating against people because of the color of their skin is also in the Constitution now that the laws have passed and been upheld by the SCOTUS.

I would not object to Christian Sunday AM church service at YOUR business if you wanted one. But others might. I would not object to individual prayer at my business, it happens everyday I expect. And the Constitution protects that right for sure.

However, if I deny customers based on their sexual orientation, then I am discriminating based on a lawful thing/act/culture/whatever as defined by the Supreme Court and therefore I am in defiance of the Constitution of the USA.

You really should read up on this stuff. I mean, I had to in order to become a citizen. But yes, I actually had to earn that, whereas you were simply born here. the easy way I guess.

[tkhayes 124]

Quote

How about, "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service" or No Smoking or Turn Off Cell Phones. Aren't those behavioral issues?

Those issues have no been addressed in the Constitution or by the SCOTUS, whereas gay marriage has been.

[billvon 2,384]

>So, a grimy, unwashed, diseased, sick, coughing, homeless woman

??? Where were any of the above listed by Ron?

[gowlerk 1,903]

Quote

...but when "discriminating" against gays, it isn't necessarily for being gay, it's because of their behavior.

People/businesses shouldn't be forced to accept nor participate in someone else's behavior that they find objectionable.

What behavior could you mean? What do gay people do that is objectionable?

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[turtlespeed 212]

gowlerk

Quote

...but when "discriminating" against gays, it isn't necessarily for being gay, it's because of their behavior.

People/businesses shouldn't be forced to accept nor participate in someone else's behavior that they find objectionable.

What behavior could you mean? What do gay people do that is objectionable?

If you don't know, you wouldn't believe it.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[gowlerk 1,903]

Quote

If you don't know, you wouldn't believe it.

But I don't know, and neither do you. You only know what YOU do. I know people who find skydiving objectionable. (my mother for one)

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[turtlespeed 212]

gowlerk

Quote

If you don't know, you wouldn't believe it.

But I don't know, and neither do you. You only know what YOU do. I know people who find skydiving objectionable. (my mother for one)

Your question was, "What do gay people do that is objectionable?".

So, you should have stopped after, "But I don't know."

Since you don't know, you wouldn't believe it.

I do know. If you knew, you would know, and by extension, believe it.

But you don't and, by extension, you wouldn't.

Right?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[kallend 1,621]

turtlespeed

***

Quote

If you don't know, you wouldn't believe it.

But I don't know, and neither do you. You only know what YOU do. I know people who find skydiving objectionable. (my mother for one)

Your question was, "What do gay people do that is objectionable?".

So, you should have stopped after, "But I don't know."

Since you don't know, you wouldn't believe it.

I do know. If you knew, you would know, and by extension, believe it.

But you don't and, by extension, you wouldn't.

Right?

Let's modify it slightly to "what behavior IN THE STORE do gay people indulge in that is objectionable?" Objecting to something they may do at home, in private, is irrelevant to the store owner unless the store owner is a bigot.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[gowlerk 1,903]

turtlespeed

***

Quote

If you don't know, you wouldn't believe it.

But I don't know, and neither do you. You only know what YOU do. I know people who find skydiving objectionable. (my mother for one)

Your question was, "What do gay people do that is objectionable?".

So, you should have stopped after, "But I don't know."

Since you don't know, you wouldn't believe it.

I do know. If you knew, you would know, and by extension, believe it.

But you don't and, by extension, you wouldn't.

Right?


But... now I am confused. You may think you know what gay people do. But there are millions of them out there doing things you will never know of. So I still say that even if you and I were both gay, we still would not know what behavior Coreeece objects to. And since I was asking him, this is just a side show. I just want to know what this objectionable behavior could be. You are only adding to the mystery!!!

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[turtlespeed 212]

gowlerk

******

Quote

If you don't know, you wouldn't believe it.

But I don't know, and neither do you. You only know what YOU do. I know people who find skydiving objectionable. (my mother for one)

Your question was, "What do gay people do that is objectionable?".

So, you should have stopped after, "But I don't know."

Since you don't know, you wouldn't believe it.

I do know. If you knew, you would know, and by extension, believe it.

But you don't and, by extension, you wouldn't.

Right?


But... now I am confused. You may think you know what gay people do. But there are millions of them out there doing things you will never know of. So I still say that even if you and I were both gay, we still would not know what behavior Coreeece objects to. And since I was asking him, this is just a side show. I just want to know what this objectionable behavior could be. You are only adding to the mystery!!!

In the words of Tu Pac, " if you don't know . . . Now ya know . . ."

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Coreeece 2]

billvon

>The difference between discriminating against blacks and discriminating against
>gays is that when you are discriminating against blacks, you are discriminating
>against them for being black.

Not at all! Ask any modern racist. They have nothing against their skin color; it's their way of life, their communities, their poor morals, their low intelligence, their lack of work ethic, their broken families, their propensity towards crime, the inherent shiftlessness of blacks, their "gangsta culture" - those are the reasons that they consider blacks inferior.

Those are just stereotypes that don't define black people.

Homosexuals are defined by, well, homosexuality.

billvon

>People/businesses shouldn't be forced to accept nor participate in someone
>else's behavior that they find objectionable.

Ah. So if a store doesn't like people with disabilities - because they behave differently and require expensive ramps and wider bathrooms - it's OK to exclude them? It's not that the store dislikes the handicapped, o no! It's because they demand unreasonable things. If they just behaved differently the store would have no problem with them. It's their fault. (According to the store, at least.)

I have two very small businesses (so small, I need two of them) - Home Improvement & video Production.

For the home improvement business, It's hard for me to see a situation where I'd deny service to a gay couple. Painting a house or building a deck have nothing to do with homosexuality directly - in fact, I wouldn't even need to know their sexual preference to complete the work. Even if I did, it would be bigoted to deny service strictly because "they're gay and I don't like gay people."

The Video production business however is a bit different. If a heterosexual couple asked for me to record/edit a video of them engaging in coitus for the first time as a married couple, I'd have to decline. It's not a service I provide and find it morally objectionable to participate in any way - neither would I want the company to be associated with pornography.

If a gay couple asked for me to record/edit a video of their child's birthday or some other non-homosexual event (lol), I wouldn't have a problem.

If a gay couple wanted me to record/edit their wedding, I'd have to decline. Same sex marriage videos are not a service I provide and would find it morally objectionable to participate given my personal beliefs...besides, I was told that it's none of my business if a man wants to marry another man.

If someone doesn't understand my beliefs and all of a sudden wants to make it my business and force me to participate or sue/imprison me for it, then perhaps they're the bigoted ones.

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[Coreeece 2]

DanG

Coreece says they can ban gays because being gay is a behavior. Do you agree?

Nope...

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[Coreeece 2]

gowlerk

I know people who find skydiving objectionable. (my mother for one)

Right, and people don't go around calling her a bigot because of it.

If I thought skydiving was morally wrong, I would decline to participate in anyway, even if it was something simple like creating a video and promoting such behavior.

I've declined media production services to a church because I disagreed with the message and didn't want to be a part of it...no bigotry needed.

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[DanG 1]

You said:

Quote

The difference between discriminating against blacks and discriminating against gays is that when you are discriminating against blacks, you are discriminating against them for being black.

...but when "discriminating" against gays, it isn't necessarily for being gay, it's because of their behavior.

People/businesses shouldn't be forced to accept nor participate in someone else's behavior that they find objectionable.

I see you're clarified yourself further down. Thank you.

I suspect a refusal to video a gay wedding might run counter to the law, BTW.

- Dan G

[jakee 1,254]

Quote

The Video production business however is a bit different. If a heterosexual couple asked for me to record/edit a video of them engaging in coitus for the first time as a married couple, I'd have to decline. It's not a service I provide and find it morally objectionable to participate in any way - neither would I want the company to be associated with pornography.

So that's nothing to do with them being gay (unless you think only gay people like to have sex tapes or watch porn!). It's simply a service you don't provide to anyone.

So I don't really know why you brought it up unless you're trying to play on people's emotions by making them think "Eww, gross, gay sex - Coreece has a point there!" Or maybe you're just fascinated by the idea of gay sex. Who knows?

Quote

If a gay couple wanted me to record/edit their wedding, I'd have to decline.

Now that's discrimination.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[normiss 620]

Selective discrimination.
That makes it ok in some folk's minds.

[JerryBaumchen 1,047]

Hi Dan,

Quote

I suspect a refusal to video a gay wedding might run counter to the law

I do not know about the entire country, but it will for sure in Oregon.

And that is a good thing IMO,

Jerry Baumchen

[Coreeece 2]

DanG

I suspect a refusal to video a gay wedding might run counter to the law, BTW.

Which is probably why the law needs to change to protect people from being sued and/or thrown in jail by bigoted people that are intolerant of others religious beliefs.

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[DanG 1]

Quote

Which is probably why the law needs to change to protect people from being sued and/or thrown in jail by bigoted people that are intolerant of others religious beliefs.

So, it's okay to be bigoted if you wrap it up in religion?

Your freedom to practice your religion ends when it interferes with my rights. It's that simple.

- Dan G

[Coreeece 2]

jakee

Quote

The Video production business however is a bit different. If a heterosexual couple asked for me to record/edit a video of them engaging in coitus for the first time as a married couple, I'd have to decline. It's not a service I provide and find it morally objectionable to participate in any way - neither would I want the company to be associated with pornography.

So that's nothing to do with them being gay

I know, I said heterosexual...

jakee

It's simply a service you don't provide to anyone.

Exactly...I will service gay people, but I do not provide gay services to anyone....there.

jakee

So I don't really know why you brought it up unless you're trying to play on people's emotions by making them think "Eww, gross, gay sex - Coreece has a point there!" Or maybe you're just fascinated by the idea of gay sex. Who knows?

I brought it up to illustrate that's it not necessarily about the people that are requesting a particular service, but rather the service itself that I do not provide.

I also mentioned how I refused service to a church because the message conflicted with my personal beliefs. It's not that I'm discriminating against christians, I just don't want to be a part of that particular type of service nor promote it.

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[Coreeece 2]

DanG

Quote

Which is probably why the law needs to change to protect people from being sued and/or thrown in jail by bigoted people that are intolerant of others religious beliefs.

So, it's okay to be bigoted if you wrap it up in religion?

Your freedom to practice your religion ends when it interferes with my rights. It's that simple.

I agree, I simply do not provide gay services, nor do I provide prongraphy services, nor do I promote other types of religion or christian views contrary to my beliefs...deal with it.

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour