Boycott Indiana? (2 Viewers)

[Psychopav]

They are denying providing the pizza for a gay wedding. If the same gay couple came into the restaurant and ordered pizzas to eat there, there is no issue.

What makes you say that? We are a Christian establishment, says O'Connor.The O'Connor family prides themselves in owning a business that reflects their religious beliefs.

I'm a Christian and as dar as I can tell none of our denominations calls for starving out people you disagree with.

Yeah, I read the whole article this time. If you owned a restaurant and catering business why would you want to serve gay people in the restaurant but not cater a gay function?

Serving gay people in a restaurant is no different from serving any other type of person.Catering a function whose purpose is to institutionalize an idology to which the owner is opposed is to support the institutionalization of that ideology.

It's the exact difference between loving the sinner but hating the sin imo.

The purpose isn't to intitutionalize anything its to get married. Catering a gay function is no different than any other function. The laws don't care what you think is a sin or not.

May mot be the purpose, but is the effect in the mind of some. I can see not wanting to support that, can't you? I personally wouldn't have a problem delivering pizzas to such an affair but I don't deny the business owner the right to his different opinion.

 

[bigbottom]

My point was that, as a Christian, it's incumbent upon me to be the loudest voice against the gay bashing high school jock or the rural rube threatening to burn down the gay bar. It would seem disingenuous of me to turn a blind eye to those things because they are wrong, and "my group" is responsible.

Liberals in the FFA consistently turn a blind eye to the most horrific actions of the liberal groups and instead point the finger at the other side. If gay groups are putting pronographic pictures out there in protest, well good for them right? I mean, just look at what Jethro is doing in Podunk!

False equivalences seem to be a common response. The most horrific actions committed by liberal groups (especially in this case) are no where near the horrific actions on the other side. What happens to the gay kids who get bullied? They commit suicide in several cases, severe depression and psychological issues for life in many more. The pizza place will have a small bump in the road and will be doing just fine two months from now. I see your point, but don't make it seem like all actions are equal. You can also argue that the left is being intolerant of conscious CHOICES (religion) while the right is intolerant of attributes which are not a choice (race, sexual orientation).

Sure, but you could also argue that the right is indignant about real situations while the left is raising hypothetical and irrelevent straw men to counter them.You could also say that in doing so, the left in this thread is conveniently ignorig the heinous actions of individuals on their side of the ideological fence, or even defending them when they should be condemning them.

If I made it a point to make a post condemning everything condemnable, I'd have little time to do anything else.

 

[Psychopav]

My point was that, as a Christian, it's incumbent upon me to be the loudest voice against the gay bashing high school jock or the rural rube threatening to burn down the gay bar. It would seem disingenuous of me to turn a blind eye to those things because they are wrong, and "my group" is responsible.

Liberals in the FFA consistently turn a blind eye to the most horrific actions of the liberal groups and instead point the finger at the other side. If gay groups are putting pronographic pictures out there in protest, well good for them right? I mean, just look at what Jethro is doing in Podunk!

That may be your point, but it's apparent that you completely missed mine.

I must have.

 

[Todd Andrews]

My point was that, as a Christian, it's incumbent upon me to be the loudest voice against the gay bashing high school jock or the rural rube threatening to burn down the gay bar. It would seem disingenuous of me to turn a blind eye to those things because they are wrong, and "my group" is responsible.

Liberals in the FFA consistently turn a blind eye to the most horrific actions of the liberal groups and instead point the finger at the other side. If gay groups are putting pronographic pictures out there in protest, well good for them right? I mean, just look at what Jethro is doing in Podunk!

That may be your point, but it's apparent that you completely missed mine.

I must have.

You were too busy passively defending bigotry.

 

[tonydead]

They are denying providing the pizza for a gay wedding. If the same gay couple came into the restaurant and ordered pizzas to eat there, there is no issue.

What makes you say that? We are a Christian establishment, says O'Connor.The O'Connor family prides themselves in owning a business that reflects their religious beliefs.

I'm a Christian and as dar as I can tell none of our denominations calls for starving out people you disagree with.

Yeah, I read the whole article this time. If you owned a restaurant and catering business why would you want to serve gay people in the restaurant but not cater a gay function?

Serving gay people in a restaurant is no different from serving any other type of person.Catering a function whose purpose is to institutionalize an idology to which the owner is opposed is to support the institutionalization of that ideology.

It's the exact difference between loving the sinner but hating the sin imo.

The purpose isn't to intitutionalize anything its to get married. Catering a gay function is no different than any other function. The laws don't care what you think is a sin or not.

May mot be the purpose, but is the effect in the mind of some. I can see not wanting to support that, can't you? I personally wouldn't have a problem delivering pizzas to such an affair but I don't deny the business owner the right to his different opinion.

They can have all the opinions they want, but, if they discriminate because of them they leave themselves open to getting sued. Just replace gay in all your opinions with black and you'll see what I mean.

 

[Psychopav]

My point was that, as a Christian, it's incumbent upon me to be the loudest voice against the gay bashing high school jock or the rural rube threatening to burn down the gay bar. It would seem disingenuous of me to turn a blind eye to those things because they are wrong, and "my group" is responsible.

Liberals in the FFA consistently turn a blind eye to the most horrific actions of the liberal groups and instead point the finger at the other side. If gay groups are putting pronographic pictures out there in protest, well good for them right? I mean, just look at what Jethro is doing in Podunk!

That may be your point, but it's apparent that you completely missed mine.

I must have.

You were too busy passively defending bigotry.

Careful dismounting your high horse.

 

[drummer]

My point was that, as a Christian, it's incumbent upon me to be the loudest voice against the gay bashing high school jock or the rural rube threatening to burn down the gay bar. It would seem disingenuous of me to turn a blind eye to those things because they are wrong, and "my group" is responsible.

Liberals in the FFA consistently turn a blind eye to the most horrific actions of the liberal groups and instead point the finger at the other side. If gay groups are putting pronographic pictures out there in protest, well good for them right? I mean, just look at what Jethro is doing in Podunk!

That may be your point, but it's apparent that you completely missed mine.

I must have.

You were too busy passively defending bigotry.

Careful dismounting your high horse.

 

[Todd Andrews]

My point was that, as a Christian, it's incumbent upon me to be the loudest voice against the gay bashing high school jock or the rural rube threatening to burn down the gay bar. It would seem disingenuous of me to turn a blind eye to those things because they are wrong, and "my group" is responsible.

Liberals in the FFA consistently turn a blind eye to the most horrific actions of the liberal groups and instead point the finger at the other side. If gay groups are putting pronographic pictures out there in protest, well good for them right? I mean, just look at what Jethro is doing in Podunk!

That may be your point, but it's apparent that you completely missed mine.

I must have.

You were too busy passively defending bigotry.

Careful dismounting your high horse.

No worries, I wont step in your pile of crapola.

 

[Psychopav]

They are denying providing the pizza for a gay wedding. If the same gay couple came into the restaurant and ordered pizzas to eat there, there is no issue.

What makes you say that? We are a Christian establishment, says O'Connor.The O'Connor family prides themselves in owning a business that reflects their religious beliefs.

I'm a Christian and as dar as I can tell none of our denominations calls for starving out people you disagree with.

Yeah, I read the whole article this time. If you owned a restaurant and catering business why would you want to serve gay people in the restaurant but not cater a gay function?

Serving gay people in a restaurant is no different from serving any other type of person.Catering a function whose purpose is to institutionalize an idology to which the owner is opposed is to support the institutionalization of that ideology.

It's the exact difference between loving the sinner but hating the sin imo.

The purpose isn't to intitutionalize anything its to get married. Catering a gay function is no different than any other function. The laws don't care what you think is a sin or not.

May mot be the purpose, but is the effect in the mind of some. I can see not wanting to support that, can't you? I personally wouldn't have a problem delivering pizzas to such an affair but I don't deny the business owner the right to his different opinion.

They can have all the opinions they want, but, if they discriminate because of them they leave themselves open to getting sued. Just replace gay in all your opinions with black and you'll see what I mean.

This is where I struggle and apparently others do too. Businesses do have the right to discriminate in most situations, and not just for marketing/brand management reasons (like a club with a velvet rope). A small business owner should have the right to refuse service just need to keep working to determine where the line is.Ultimately, while everyone is jumping to the knee jerk condemnation of Indiana's law, isn't it possible that they end up witj a more nuanced version of the rfra than exists now? That would be progress, and a good thing imo.

 

[drummer]

They are denying providing the pizza for a gay wedding. If the same gay couple came into the restaurant and ordered pizzas to eat there, there is no issue.

What makes you say that? We are a Christian establishment, says O'Connor.The O'Connor family prides themselves in owning a business that reflects their religious beliefs.

I'm a Christian and as dar as I can tell none of our denominations calls for starving out people you disagree with.

Yeah, I read the whole article this time. If you owned a restaurant and catering business why would you want to serve gay people in the restaurant but not cater a gay function?

Serving gay people in a restaurant is no different from serving any other type of person.Catering a function whose purpose is to institutionalize an idology to which the owner is opposed is to support the institutionalization of that ideology.

It's the exact difference between loving the sinner but hating the sin imo.

The purpose isn't to intitutionalize anything its to get married. Catering a gay function is no different than any other function. The laws don't care what you think is a sin or not.

May mot be the purpose, but is the effect in the mind of some. I can see not wanting to support that, can't you? I personally wouldn't have a problem delivering pizzas to such an affair but I don't deny the business owner the right to his different opinion.

They can have all the opinions they want, but, if they discriminate because of them they leave themselves open to getting sued. Just replace gay in all your opinions with black and you'll see what I mean.

This is where I struggle and apparently others do too. Businesses do have the right to discriminate in most situations, and not just for marketing/brand management reasons (like a club with a velvet rope). A small business owner should have the right to refuse service just need to keep working to determine where the line is.Ultimately, while everyone is jumping to the knee jerk condemnation of Indiana's law, isn't it possible that they end up witj a more nuanced version of the rfra than exists now? That would be progress, and a good thing imo.

Sure, let's just write more legislation discriminating against you.

"Bigots need not shop here".

Problem solved.

 

[Todd Andrews]

They are denying providing the pizza for a gay wedding. If the same gay couple came into the restaurant and ordered pizzas to eat there, there is no issue.

What makes you say that? We are a Christian establishment, says O'Connor.The O'Connor family prides themselves in owning a business that reflects their religious beliefs.

I'm a Christian and as dar as I can tell none of our denominations calls for starving out people you disagree with.

Yeah, I read the whole article this time. If you owned a restaurant and catering business why would you want to serve gay people in the restaurant but not cater a gay function?

Serving gay people in a restaurant is no different from serving any other type of person.Catering a function whose purpose is to institutionalize an idology to which the owner is opposed is to support the institutionalization of that ideology.

It's the exact difference between loving the sinner but hating the sin imo.

The purpose isn't to intitutionalize anything its to get married. Catering a gay function is no different than any other function. The laws don't care what you think is a sin or not.

May mot be the purpose, but is the effect in the mind of some. I can see not wanting to support that, can't you? I personally wouldn't have a problem delivering pizzas to such an affair but I don't deny the business owner the right to his different opinion.

They can have all the opinions they want, but, if they discriminate because of them they leave themselves open to getting sued. Just replace gay in all your opinions with black and you'll see what I mean.

This is where I struggle and apparently others do too. Businesses do have the right to discriminate in most situations, and not just for marketing/brand management reasons (like a club with a velvet rope). A small business owner should have the right to refuse service just need to keep working to determine where the line is.Ultimately, while everyone is jumping to the knee jerk condemnation of Indiana's law, isn't it possible that they end up witj a more nuanced version of the rfra than exists now? That would be progress, and a good thing imo.

Yes, if the backlash to their bigot law results in a non-bigot law, that would be progress. Brilliant.

And any business owner who wants to take advantage of the roads paid for by Americans, the infrastructure paid for by Americans, the rule of law built and paid for by Americans, the financial structure created and paid for by Americans, etc, but still wants to discriminate against some Americans based on race, or gender, or who they marry or have sex with...well, that small business owner is a terd and bigot and can suck it.

This isnt a gray area. There is no nuance. Calling bigotry religion or values doesnt make it not bigotry.

 

[urbanhack]

They are denying providing the pizza for a gay wedding. If the same gay couple came into the restaurant and ordered pizzas to eat there, there is no issue.

What makes you say that? We are a Christian establishment, says O'Connor.The O'Connor family prides themselves in owning a business that reflects their religious beliefs.

I'm a Christian and as dar as I can tell none of our denominations calls for starving out people you disagree with.

Yeah, I read the whole article this time. If you owned a restaurant and catering business why would you want to serve gay people in the restaurant but not cater a gay function?

Serving gay people in a restaurant is no different from serving any other type of person.Catering a function whose purpose is to institutionalize an idology to which the owner is opposed is to support the institutionalization of that ideology.

It's the exact difference between loving the sinner but hating the sin imo.

The purpose isn't to intitutionalize anything its to get married. Catering a gay function is no different than any other function. The laws don't care what you think is a sin or not.

May mot be the purpose, but is the effect in the mind of some. I can see not wanting to support that, can't you? I personally wouldn't have a problem delivering pizzas to such an affair but I don't deny the business owner the right to his different opinion.

They can have all the opinions they want, but, if they discriminate because of them they leave themselves open to getting sued. Just replace gay in all your opinions with black and you'll see what I mean.

This is where I struggle and apparently others do too. Businesses do have the right to discriminate in most situations, and not just for marketing/brand management reasons (like a club with a velvet rope). A small business owner should have the right to refuse service just need to keep working to determine where the line is.Ultimately, while everyone is jumping to the knee jerk condemnation of Indiana's law, isn't it possible that they end up witj a more nuanced version of the rfra than exists now? That would be progress, and a good thing imo.

Can you list some other situations where owners have the right to discriminate? Dress code? Behavior? What else?

 

[drummer]

Yes, if the backlash to their bigot law results in a non-bigot law, that would be progress. Brilliant.

And any business owner who wants to take advantage of the roads paid for by Americans, the infrastructure paid for by Americans, the rule of law built and paid for by Americans, the financial structure created and paid for by Americans, etc, but still wants to discriminate against some Americans based on race, or gender, or who they marry or have sex with...well, that small business owner is a terd and bigot and can suck it.

This isnt a gray area. There is no nuance. Calling bigotry religion or values doesnt make it not bigotry.

Yeah but he HAS A RIGHT TO BE A BIGOT.

 

[mr roboto]

Lol at bigot. Shut the #### up with that hyperbole. Are there homophobic bigots? Of course. Is every religious person who feels homosexuality is wrong a bigot? Of course not. Is a business owner who doesn't want his or her products or services to be part of a homosexual wedding? Not necessarily. But irrational mass backlash from the tolerant majority? PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE!!!! **** PIZZA LOLOLOLOLZZZZZZZ! DEATH THREAT, THEY DESERVE IT!!!!!!

Some of you need to grow up.

 

[squistion]

Memories Pizza really suffering so far. Over $36k raised on a support page to help these hapless victims of Big Gay.

http://www.gofundme.com/MemoriesPizza

 

[drummer]

Lol at bigot. Shut the #### up with that hyperbole. Are there homophobic bigots? Of course. Is every religious person who feels homosexuality is wrong a bigot? Of course not. Is a business owner who doesn't want his or her products or services to be part of a homosexual wedding? Not necessarily. But irrational mass backlash from the tolerant majority? PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE!!!! **** PIZZA LOLOLOLOLZZZZZZZ! DEATH THREAT, THEY DESERVE IT!!!!!!

Some of you need to grow up.

What a great a self ### kicking post.

 

[mr roboto]

Lol at bigot. Shut the #### up with that hyperbole. Are there homophobic bigots? Of course. Is every religious person who feels homosexuality is wrong a bigot? Of course not. Is a business owner who doesn't want his or her products or services to be part of a homosexual wedding? Not necessarily. But irrational mass backlash from the tolerant majority? PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE!!!! **** PIZZA LOLOLOLOLZZZZZZZ! DEATH THREAT, THEY DESERVE IT!!!!!!

Some of you need to grow up.

What a great a self ### kicking post.

You think the response to the pizza business is reasonable?

 

[drummer]

Lol at bigot. Shut the #### up with that hyperbole. Are there homophobic bigots? Of course. Is every religious person who feels homosexuality is wrong a bigot? Of course not. Is a business owner who doesn't want his or her products or services to be part of a homosexual wedding? Not necessarily. But irrational mass backlash from the tolerant majority? PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE!!!! **** PIZZA LOLOLOLOLZZZZZZZ! DEATH THREAT, THEY DESERVE IT!!!!!!

Some of you need to grow up.

What a great a self ### kicking post.

You think the response to the pizza business is reasonable?

I'm talking about your post. The bolded would had been better left out.

But OK.

 

[mr roboto]

Lol at bigot. Shut the #### up with that hyperbole. Are there homophobic bigots? Of course. Is every religious person who feels homosexuality is wrong a bigot? Of course not. Is a business owner who doesn't want his or her products or services to be part of a homosexual wedding? Not necessarily. But irrational mass backlash from the tolerant majority? PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE!!!! **** PIZZA LOLOLOLOLZZZZZZZ! DEATH THREAT, THEY DESERVE IT!!!!!!

Some of you need to grow up.

What a great a self ### kicking post.

You think the response to the pizza business is reasonable?

I'm talking about your post. The bolded would had been better left out.

But OK.

Don't know why I tried to ask you a question. Should have known better.

 

[Todd Andrews]

Lol at bigot. Shut the #### up with that hyperbole. Are there homophobic bigots? Of course. Is every religious person who feels homosexuality is wrong a bigot? Of course not. Is a business owner who doesn't want his or her products or services to be part of a homosexual wedding? Not necessarily. But irrational mass backlash from the tolerant majority? PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE!!!! **** PIZZA LOLOLOLOLZZZZZZZ! DEATH THREAT, THEY DESERVE IT!!!!!!

Some of you need to grow up.

What a great a self ### kicking post.

You think the response to the pizza business is reasonable?

Death threats are never acceptable. But mocking bigots? Absolutely acceptable.

**** pizza is hilarious when some dumb bigot goes on TV and says his religion wont let him cater pizzas to a gay wedding. Are you kidding? That is a slamdunk setup for welldeserved mockery.

 

[mr roboto]

Lol at bigot. Shut the #### up with that hyperbole. Are there homophobic bigots? Of course. Is every religious person who feels homosexuality is wrong a bigot? Of course not. Is a business owner who doesn't want his or her products or services to be part of a homosexual wedding? Not necessarily. But irrational mass backlash from the tolerant majority? PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE!!!! **** PIZZA LOLOLOLOLZZZZZZZ! DEATH THREAT, THEY DESERVE IT!!!!!!

Some of you need to grow up.

What a great a self ### kicking post.

You think the response to the pizza business is reasonable?

Death threats are never acceptable. But mocking bigots? Absolutely acceptable.

**** pizza is hilarious when some dumb bigot goes on TV and says his religion wont let him cater pizzas to a gay wedding. Are you kidding? That is a slamdunk setup for welldeserved mockery.

Refusing to cater a gay wedding = bigotry? To be clear I think it's dumb for them to go on record like that (and quite frankly to refuse to cater a gay wedding). It's not 'bigotry' though. That's the hyperbole I'm talking about.

 

[Todd Andrews]

Lol at bigot. Shut the #### up with that hyperbole. Are there homophobic bigots? Of course. Is every religious person who feels homosexuality is wrong a bigot? Of course not. Is a business owner who doesn't want his or her products or services to be part of a homosexual wedding? Not necessarily. But irrational mass backlash from the tolerant majority? PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE!!!! **** PIZZA LOLOLOLOLZZZZZZZ! DEATH THREAT, THEY DESERVE IT!!!!!!

Some of you need to grow up.

What a great a self ### kicking post.

You think the response to the pizza business is reasonable?

Death threats are never acceptable. But mocking bigots? Absolutely acceptable.

**** pizza is hilarious when some dumb bigot goes on TV and says his religion wont let him cater pizzas to a gay wedding. Are you kidding? That is a slamdunk setup for welldeserved mockery.

Refusing to cater a gay wedding = bigotry? To be clear I think it's dumb for them to go on record like that (and quite frankly to refuse to cater a gay wedding). It's not 'bigotry' though. That's the hyperbole I'm talking about.

It is ok to admit you dont know what the word bigot means.

 

[timschochet]

Mr. Roboto, your objection represents the evolution of our culture, which has not taken hold all the way.

If the pizza place refused to cater an interracial marriage, you would regard that as bigotry. But 40 years ago you might not have; you might have regarded it as a perfectly legitimate point of view, even if you didn't agree with it.

40 years from now, probably much less, anyone who objects to gay marriage will be regarded as expressing a backwards, bigoted view. But right now we're still in flux, and some people still think such a view is legitimate- mostly older people.

 

[Todd Andrews]

Mr. Roboto, your objection represents the evolution of our culture, which has not taken hold all the way.

If the pizza place refused to cater an interracial marriage, you would regard that as bigotry. But 40 years ago you might not have; you might have regarded it as a perfectly legitimate point of view, even if you didn't agree with it.

40 years from now, probably much less, anyone who objects to gay marriage will be regarded as expressing a backwards, bigoted view. But right now we're still in flux, and some people still think such a view is legitimate- mostly older people.

Mr. Roboto, in 2012, timschtrotner had the same position as you do now, but see how he has evolved in only 3 years. Tim argued endlessly with me that supporting politicians who want to pass legislation banning gay marriages isnt supporting bigots and bigoted legislation....when it obviously is to anyone with any sense or logic.

Luckily, Tim gave up his bigotry support, it seems. You should consider it.

 

[CowboysFromHell]

My point was that, as a Christian, it's incumbent upon me to be the loudest voice against the gay bashing high school jock or the rural rube threatening to burn down the gay bar. It would seem disingenuous of me to turn a blind eye to those things because they are wrong, and "my group" is responsible.

Liberals in the FFA consistently turn a blind eye to the most horrific actions of the liberal groups and instead point the finger at the other side. If gay groups are putting pronographic pictures out there in protest, well good for them right? I mean, just look at what Jethro is doing in Podunk!

False equivalences seem to be a common response. The most horrific actions committed by liberal groups (especially in this case) are no where near the horrific actions on the other side. What happens to the gay kids who get bullied? They commit suicide in several cases, severe depression and psychological issues for life in many more. The pizza place will have a small bump in the road and will be doing just fine two months from now. I see your point, but don't make it seem like all actions are equal. You can also argue that the left is being intolerant of conscious CHOICES (religion) while the right is intolerant of attributes which are not a choice (race, sexual orientation).

In all fairness, a case could be made that religion isn't always a conscious choice.

 

[urbanhack]

My point was that, as a Christian, it's incumbent upon me to be the loudest voice against the gay bashing high school jock or the rural rube threatening to burn down the gay bar. It would seem disingenuous of me to turn a blind eye to those things because they are wrong, and "my group" is responsible.

Liberals in the FFA consistently turn a blind eye to the most horrific actions of the liberal groups and instead point the finger at the other side. If gay groups are putting pronographic pictures out there in protest, well good for them right? I mean, just look at what Jethro is doing in Podunk!

False equivalences seem to be a common response. The most horrific actions committed by liberal groups (especially in this case) are no where near the horrific actions on the other side. What happens to the gay kids who get bullied? They commit suicide in several cases, severe depression and psychological issues for life in many more. The pizza place will have a small bump in the road and will be doing just fine two months from now. I see your point, but don't make it seem like all actions are equal. You can also argue that the left is being intolerant of conscious CHOICES (religion) while the right is intolerant of attributes which are not a choice (race, sexual orientation).

In all fairness, a case could be made that religion isn't always a conscious choice.

How so? Are people born religious? I was raised and indoctrinated into religion, but I made a choice to reject it. When is it not?

 

[mr roboto]

Mr. Roboto, your objection represents the evolution of our culture, which has not taken hold all the way.

If the pizza place refused to cater an interracial marriage, you would regard that as bigotry. But 40 years ago you might not have; you might have regarded it as a perfectly legitimate point of view, even if you didn't agree with it.

40 years from now, probably much less, anyone who objects to gay marriage will be regarded as expressing a backwards, bigoted view. But right now we're still in flux, and some people still think such a view is legitimate- mostly older people.

Mr. Roboto, in 2012, timschtrotner had the same position as you do now, but see how he has evolved in only 3 years. Tim argued endlessly with me that supporting politicians who want to pass legislation banning gay marriages isnt supporting bigots and bigoted legislation....when it obviously is to anyone with any sense or logic.

Luckily, Tim gave up his bigotry support, it seems. You should consider it.

You don't know anything about my political beliefs regarding gay marriage. I'm sorry to tell you this but you jump to conclusions inappropriately here. I believe that in our constitutional democracy gay people should be allowed to legally join and call it a marriage under the laws of our country. As a Christian, I would not adopt the policy that this pizza restaurant has adopted. I am in equity investor and full-time employee of a small company who has employees and licensed partners who are gay. The founder and CEO of our company is also a Christian man and has no problem hiring or licensing the rights to our business to gay people. But my personal religious beliefs on human sexuality do not define me as a bigot. I also do not believe that from what I've read, this pizza restaurant in Indiana has proven to us that they are in fact a bigoted couple. They may very well be bigots and they very well may be embarrassingly prejudiced against gay people.

My concern however is that we are fighting strongly for the rights of gay people to be equals and to be married and to be given all of the legal and consumer protections that any other group has under the law yet we seek to restrict private business owners from conscientiously objecting to something that is against their religious beliefs that does not demonstrably discriminate or cause harm to anybody else.

I will continue to be open-minded on this topic because I am conflicted on this issue. But I am absolutely certain that I'm embarrassed by the collateral damage that this business and others have suffered for trying to be reasonable and attempting to be honest about their own religious beliefs and how they would interact with providing services to those who they may have a strong disagreement with. My final comment is that I think this pizza restaurant is taking the brunt of a conversation and there are plenty of true bigots that should be lambasted and embarrassed far more than this couple has been.

 

[Todd Andrews]

Mr. Roboto, your objection represents the evolution of our culture, which has not taken hold all the way.

If the pizza place refused to cater an interracial marriage, you would regard that as bigotry. But 40 years ago you might not have; you might have regarded it as a perfectly legitimate point of view, even if you didn't agree with it.

40 years from now, probably much less, anyone who objects to gay marriage will be regarded as expressing a backwards, bigoted view. But right now we're still in flux, and some people still think such a view is legitimate- mostly older people.

Mr. Roboto, in 2012, timschtrotner had the same position as you do now, but see how he has evolved in only 3 years. Tim argued endlessly with me that supporting politicians who want to pass legislation banning gay marriages isnt supporting bigots and bigoted legislation....when it obviously is to anyone with any sense or logic.

Luckily, Tim gave up his bigotry support, it seems. You should consider it.

You don't know anything about my political beliefs regarding gay marriage. I'm sorry to tell you this but you jump to conclusions inappropriately here. I believe that in our constitutional democracy gay people should be allowed to legally join and call it a marriage under the laws of our country. As a Christian, I would not adopt the policy that this pizza restaurant has adopted. I am in equity investor and full-time employee of a small company who has employees and licensed partners who are gay. The founder and CEO of our company is also a Christian man and has no problem hiring or licensing the rights to our business to gay people.But my personal religious beliefs on human sexuality do not define me as a bigot. I also do not believe that from what I've read, this pizza restaurant in Indiana has proven to us that they are in fact a bigoted couple. They may very well be bigots and they very well may be embarrassingly prejudiced against gay people.

My concern however is that we are fighting strongly for the rights of gay people to be equals and to be married and to be given all of the legal and consumer protections that any other group has under the law yet we seek to restrict private business owners from conscientiously objecting to something that is against their religious believes that does not demonstrably discriminate or cause harm to anybody else.

I will continue to be open-minded on this topic because I am conflicted on this issue. But I am absolutely certain that I'm embarrassed by the collateral damage that this business and others have suffered for trying to be reasonable and attempting to be honest about their own religious beliefs and how they would interact with providing services to those who they may have a strong disagreement with. My final comment is that I think this pizza restaurant is taking the brunt of a conversation and there are plenty of true bigots that should be lambasted and embarrassed far more than this couple has been.

I am happy to lambast those "true bigots" if you point me at them. In the meantime, idiots like these pizza parlor owners, who stupidly think the teachings of Jesus have something to do with who people have sex with or marry, should bear the brunt of their own moronic comments.

I dont know you. I just know you were sort of, kind of, ambiguously, and passively, defending some dumb bigots who are deservedly getting mocked mercilessly. No sympathy here for them, or you, to the extent you want to defend them.

 

[mr roboto]

Mr. Roboto, your objection represents the evolution of our culture, which has not taken hold all the way.

If the pizza place refused to cater an interracial marriage, you would regard that as bigotry. But 40 years ago you might not have; you might have regarded it as a perfectly legitimate point of view, even if you didn't agree with it.

40 years from now, probably much less, anyone who objects to gay marriage will be regarded as expressing a backwards, bigoted view. But right now we're still in flux, and some people still think such a view is legitimate- mostly older people.

Mr. Roboto, in 2012, timschtrotner had the same position as you do now, but see how he has evolved in only 3 years. Tim argued endlessly with me that supporting politicians who want to pass legislation banning gay marriages isnt supporting bigots and bigoted legislation....when it obviously is to anyone with any sense or logic.

Luckily, Tim gave up his bigotry support, it seems. You should consider it.

You don't know anything about my political beliefs regarding gay marriage. I'm sorry to tell you this but you jump to conclusions inappropriately here. I believe that in our constitutional democracy gay people should be allowed to legally join and call it a marriage under the laws of our country. As a Christian, I would not adopt the policy that this pizza restaurant has adopted. I am in equity investor and full-time employee of a small company who has employees and licensed partners who are gay. The founder and CEO of our company is also a Christian man and has no problem hiring or licensing the rights to our business to gay people.But my personal religious beliefs on human sexuality do not define me as a bigot. I also do not believe that from what I've read, this pizza restaurant in Indiana has proven to us that they are in fact a bigoted couple. They may very well be bigots and they very well may be embarrassingly prejudiced against gay people.

My concern however is that we are fighting strongly for the rights of gay people to be equals and to be married and to be given all of the legal and consumer protections that any other group has under the law yet we seek to restrict private business owners from conscientiously objecting to something that is against their religious believes that does not demonstrably discriminate or cause harm to anybody else.

I will continue to be open-minded on this topic because I am conflicted on this issue. But I am absolutely certain that I'm embarrassed by the collateral damage that this business and others have suffered for trying to be reasonable and attempting to be honest about their own religious beliefs and how they would interact with providing services to those who they may have a strong disagreement with. My final comment is that I think this pizza restaurant is taking the brunt of a conversation and there are plenty of true bigots that should be lambasted and embarrassed far more than this couple has been.

I am happy to lambast those "true bigots" if you point me at them. In the meantime, idiots like these pizza parlor owners, who stupidly think the teachings of Jesus have something to do with who people have sex with or marry, should bear the brunt of their own moronic comments.

I dont know you. I just know you were sort of, kind of, ambiguously, and passively, defending some dumb bigots who are deservedly getting mocked mercilessly. No sympathy here for them, or you, to the extent you want to defend them.

I'm pointing out that the penalty they've siffered is excessive in both scope and accusation. But whatever makes you feel better I suppose.

 

[timschochet]

Mr. Roboto, your objection represents the evolution of our culture, which has not taken hold all the way.

If the pizza place refused to cater an interracial marriage, you would regard that as bigotry. But 40 years ago you might not have; you might have regarded it as a perfectly legitimate point of view, even if you didn't agree with it.

40 years from now, probably much less, anyone who objects to gay marriage will be regarded as expressing a backwards, bigoted view. But right now we're still in flux, and some people still think such a view is legitimate- mostly older people.

Mr. Roboto, in 2012, timschtrotner had the same position as you do now, but see how he has evolved in only 3 years. Tim argued endlessly with me that supporting politicians who want to pass legislation banning gay marriages isnt supporting bigots and bigoted legislation....when it obviously is to anyone with any sense or logic.

Luckily, Tim gave up his bigotry support, it seems. You should consider it.

This is a simplistic and incorrect interpretation of my views in 2012. However, I will agree that they have evolved and will likely continue to do so.

 

[urbanhack]

Mr. Roboto, your objection represents the evolution of our culture, which has not taken hold all the way.

If the pizza place refused to cater an interracial marriage, you would regard that as bigotry. But 40 years ago you might not have; you might have regarded it as a perfectly legitimate point of view, even if you didn't agree with it.

40 years from now, probably much less, anyone who objects to gay marriage will be regarded as expressing a backwards, bigoted view. But right now we're still in flux, and some people still think such a view is legitimate- mostly older people.

Mr. Roboto, in 2012, timschtrotner had the same position as you do now, but see how he has evolved in only 3 years. Tim argued endlessly with me that supporting politicians who want to pass legislation banning gay marriages isnt supporting bigots and bigoted legislation....when it obviously is to anyone with any sense or logic.

Luckily, Tim gave up his bigotry support, it seems. You should consider it.

You don't know anything about my political beliefs regarding gay marriage. I'm sorry to tell you this but you jump to conclusions inappropriately here. I believe that in our constitutional democracy gay people should be allowed to legally join and call it a marriage under the laws of our country. As a Christian, I would not adopt the policy that this pizza restaurant has adopted. I am in equity investor and full-time employee of a small company who has employees and licensed partners who are gay. The founder and CEO of our company is also a Christian man and has no problem hiring or licensing the rights to our business to gay people.But my personal religious beliefs on human sexuality do not define me as a bigot. I also do not believe that from what I've read, this pizza restaurant in Indiana has proven to us that they are in fact a bigoted couple. They may very well be bigots and they very well may be embarrassingly prejudiced against gay people.

My concern however is that we are fighting strongly for the rights of gay people to be equals and to be married and to be given all of the legal and consumer protections that any other group has under the law yet we seek to restrict private business owners from conscientiously objecting to something that is against their religious believes that does not demonstrably discriminate or cause harm to anybody else.

I will continue to be open-minded on this topic because I am conflicted on this issue. But I am absolutely certain that I'm embarrassed by the collateral damage that this business and others have suffered for trying to be reasonable and attempting to be honest about their own religious beliefs and how they would interact with providing services to those who they may have a strong disagreement with. My final comment is that I think this pizza restaurant is taking the brunt of a conversation and there are plenty of true bigots that should be lambasted and embarrassed far more than this couple has been.

I am happy to lambast those "true bigots" if you point me at them. In the meantime, idiots like these pizza parlor owners, who stupidly think the teachings of Jesus have something to do with who people have sex with or marry, should bear the brunt of their own moronic comments.

I dont know you. I just know you were sort of, kind of, ambiguously, and passively, defending some dumb bigots who are deservedly getting mocked mercilessly. No sympathy here for them, or you, to the extent you want to defend them.

I'm pointing out that the penalty they've siffered is excessive in both scope and accusation. But whatever makes you feel better I suppose.

What penalty? This is a product of their own actions.

 

[mr roboto]

Mr. Roboto, your objection represents the evolution of our culture, which has not taken hold all the way.

If the pizza place refused to cater an interracial marriage, you would regard that as bigotry. But 40 years ago you might not have; you might have regarded it as a perfectly legitimate point of view, even if you didn't agree with it.

40 years from now, probably much less, anyone who objects to gay marriage will be regarded as expressing a backwards, bigoted view. But right now we're still in flux, and some people still think such a view is legitimate- mostly older people.

Mr. Roboto, in 2012, timschtrotner had the same position as you do now, but see how he has evolved in only 3 years. Tim argued endlessly with me that supporting politicians who want to pass legislation banning gay marriages isnt supporting bigots and bigoted legislation....when it obviously is to anyone with any sense or logic.

Luckily, Tim gave up his bigotry support, it seems. You should consider it.

You don't know anything about my political beliefs regarding gay marriage. I'm sorry to tell you this but you jump to conclusions inappropriately here. I believe that in our constitutional democracy gay people should be allowed to legally join and call it a marriage under the laws of our country. As a Christian, I would not adopt the policy that this pizza restaurant has adopted. I am in equity investor and full-time employee of a small company who has employees and licensed partners who are gay. The founder and CEO of our company is also a Christian man and has no problem hiring or licensing the rights to our business to gay people.But my personal religious beliefs on human sexuality do not define me as a bigot. I also do not believe that from what I've read, this pizza restaurant in Indiana has proven to us that they are in fact a bigoted couple. They may very well be bigots and they very well may be embarrassingly prejudiced against gay people.

My concern however is that we are fighting strongly for the rights of gay people to be equals and to be married and to be given all of the legal and consumer protections that any other group has under the law yet we seek to restrict private business owners from conscientiously objecting to something that is against their religious believes that does not demonstrably discriminate or cause harm to anybody else.

I will continue to be open-minded on this topic because I am conflicted on this issue. But I am absolutely certain that I'm embarrassed by the collateral damage that this business and others have suffered for trying to be reasonable and attempting to be honest about their own religious beliefs and how they would interact with providing services to those who they may have a strong disagreement with. My final comment is that I think this pizza restaurant is taking the brunt of a conversation and there are plenty of true bigots that should be lambasted and embarrassed far more than this couple has been.

I am happy to lambast those "true bigots" if you point me at them. In the meantime, idiots like these pizza parlor owners, who stupidly think the teachings of Jesus have something to do with who people have sex with or marry, should bear the brunt of their own moronic comments.

I dont know you. I just know you were sort of, kind of, ambiguously, and passively, defending some dumb bigots who are deservedly getting mocked mercilessly. No sympathy here for them, or you, to the extent you want to defend them.

I'm pointing out that the penalty they've siffered is excessive in both scope and accusation. But whatever makes you feel better I suppose.

What penalty? This is a product of their own actions.

As far as I can tell their actions were claiming they wouldn't wabt to cater a gay wedding but would have no objection to serving pizza in their restaurant to a gay couple. That because they are not in favor of gay marriage they wouldn't want to participate in a gay wedding. Is this accurate?

 

[Todd Andrews]

Mr. Roboto, your objection represents the evolution of our culture, which has not taken hold all the way.

If the pizza place refused to cater an interracial marriage, you would regard that as bigotry. But 40 years ago you might not have; you might have regarded it as a perfectly legitimate point of view, even if you didn't agree with it.

40 years from now, probably much less, anyone who objects to gay marriage will be regarded as expressing a backwards, bigoted view. But right now we're still in flux, and some people still think such a view is legitimate- mostly older people.

Mr. Roboto, in 2012, timschtrotner had the same position as you do now, but see how he has evolved in only 3 years. Tim argued endlessly with me that supporting politicians who want to pass legislation banning gay marriages isnt supporting bigots and bigoted legislation....when it obviously is to anyone with any sense or logic.

Luckily, Tim gave up his bigotry support, it seems. You should consider it.

You don't know anything about my political beliefs regarding gay marriage. I'm sorry to tell you this but you jump to conclusions inappropriately here. I believe that in our constitutional democracy gay people should be allowed to legally join and call it a marriage under the laws of our country. As a Christian, I would not adopt the policy that this pizza restaurant has adopted. I am in equity investor and full-time employee of a small company who has employees and licensed partners who are gay. The founder and CEO of our company is also a Christian man and has no problem hiring or licensing the rights to our business to gay people.But my personal religious beliefs on human sexuality do not define me as a bigot. I also do not believe that from what I've read, this pizza restaurant in Indiana has proven to us that they are in fact a bigoted couple. They may very well be bigots and they very well may be embarrassingly prejudiced against gay people.

My concern however is that we are fighting strongly for the rights of gay people to be equals and to be married and to be given all of the legal and consumer protections that any other group has under the law yet we seek to restrict private business owners from conscientiously objecting to something that is against their religious believes that does not demonstrably discriminate or cause harm to anybody else.

I will continue to be open-minded on this topic because I am conflicted on this issue. But I am absolutely certain that I'm embarrassed by the collateral damage that this business and others have suffered for trying to be reasonable and attempting to be honest about their own religious beliefs and how they would interact with providing services to those who they may have a strong disagreement with. My final comment is that I think this pizza restaurant is taking the brunt of a conversation and there are plenty of true bigots that should be lambasted and embarrassed far more than this couple has been.

I am happy to lambast those "true bigots" if you point me at them. In the meantime, idiots like these pizza parlor owners, who stupidly think the teachings of Jesus have something to do with who people have sex with or marry, should bear the brunt of their own moronic comments.

I dont know you. I just know you were sort of, kind of, ambiguously, and passively, defending some dumb bigots who are deservedly getting mocked mercilessly. No sympathy here for them, or you, to the extent you want to defend them.

I'm pointing out that the penalty they've siffered is excessive in both scope and accusation. But whatever makes you feel better I suppose.

What penalty? Being made fun of for being bigots on the internets? Maybe people wont be so comfortable being bigots and calling their bigotry "religious beliefs" in the future if more people call them bigots to their faces publicly and contemptuously, like what is happening to these people.

Just something to think about. In 1959 a Virginia judge felt very comfortable upholding Virginia's anti-miscegenation laws because it was God's law, writing

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.

and he sentenced a man and his wife to prison terms for being married, sentences suspended if they left the state of Virginia. It took the US Supreme Court and years and years of litigation to finally get those types of laws thrown out. Maybe if everyone in the town had gone over to the Judge's street and called him a scumbag racist bigot hiding his racism and bigotry behind his "religious beliefs", things might have happened a little faster.

Like I said, no nuance, grey area or sympathy here.

 

[bigbottom]

If I had a struggling business with a crappy product, I might consider making a controversial public statement simply to get free publicity, to have random people donate money to a gofundme page, and to drive customers to my business who want to make a political point by purchasing my product. Sure, it's a risk, but if I'm sucking wind anyway, it might be worth a shot.

Not saying that is what happened here, but it could very well be a savvy business move.

 

[squistion]

Mr. Roboto, in 2012, timschtrotner had the same position as you do now, but see how he has evolved in only 3 years. Tim argued endlessly with me that supporting politicians who want to pass legislation banning gay marriages isnt supporting bigots and bigoted legislation....when it obviously is to anyone with any sense or logic.

Luckily, Tim gave up his bigotry support, it seems. You should consider it.

This is a simplistic and incorrect interpretation of my views in 2012. However, I will agree that they have evolved and will likely continue to do so.

My goodness. Tim has evolved in his views. Maybe he now is watching Al Sharpton's show on MSNBC too.

 

[Todd Andrews]

Mr. Roboto, your objection represents the evolution of our culture, which has not taken hold all the way.

If the pizza place refused to cater an interracial marriage, you would regard that as bigotry. But 40 years ago you might not have; you might have regarded it as a perfectly legitimate point of view, even if you didn't agree with it.

40 years from now, probably much less, anyone who objects to gay marriage will be regarded as expressing a backwards, bigoted view. But right now we're still in flux, and some people still think such a view is legitimate- mostly older people.

Mr. Roboto, in 2012, timschtrotner had the same position as you do now, but see how he has evolved in only 3 years. Tim argued endlessly with me that supporting politicians who want to pass legislation banning gay marriages isnt supporting bigots and bigoted legislation....when it obviously is to anyone with any sense or logic.

Luckily, Tim gave up his bigotry support, it seems. You should consider it.

This is a simplistic and incorrect interpretation of my views in 2012. However, I will agree that they have evolved and will likely continue to do so.

You keep telling yourself that, bigot supporter.

 

[urbanhack]

Mr. Roboto, your objection represents the evolution of our culture, which has not taken hold all the way.

If the pizza place refused to cater an interracial marriage, you would regard that as bigotry. But 40 years ago you might not have; you might have regarded it as a perfectly legitimate point of view, even if you didn't agree with it.

40 years from now, probably much less, anyone who objects to gay marriage will be regarded as expressing a backwards, bigoted view. But right now we're still in flux, and some people still think such a view is legitimate- mostly older people.

Mr. Roboto, in 2012, timschtrotner had the same position as you do now, but see how he has evolved in only 3 years. Tim argued endlessly with me that supporting politicians who want to pass legislation banning gay marriages isnt supporting bigots and bigoted legislation....when it obviously is to anyone with any sense or logic.

Luckily, Tim gave up his bigotry support, it seems. You should consider it.

You don't know anything about my political beliefs regarding gay marriage. I'm sorry to tell you this but you jump to conclusions inappropriately here. I believe that in our constitutional democracy gay people should be allowed to legally join and call it a marriage under the laws of our country. As a Christian, I would not adopt the policy that this pizza restaurant has adopted. I am in equity investor and full-time employee of a small company who has employees and licensed partners who are gay. The founder and CEO of our company is also a Christian man and has no problem hiring or licensing the rights to our business to gay people.But my personal religious beliefs on human sexuality do not define me as a bigot. I also do not believe that from what I've read, this pizza restaurant in Indiana has proven to us that they are in fact a bigoted couple. They may very well be bigots and they very well may be embarrassingly prejudiced against gay people.

My concern however is that we are fighting strongly for the rights of gay people to be equals and to be married and to be given all of the legal and consumer protections that any other group has under the law yet we seek to restrict private business owners from conscientiously objecting to something that is against their religious believes that does not demonstrably discriminate or cause harm to anybody else.

I will continue to be open-minded on this topic because I am conflicted on this issue. But I am absolutely certain that I'm embarrassed by the collateral damage that this business and others have suffered for trying to be reasonable and attempting to be honest about their own religious beliefs and how they would interact with providing services to those who they may have a strong disagreement with. My final comment is that I think this pizza restaurant is taking the brunt of a conversation and there are plenty of true bigots that should be lambasted and embarrassed far more than this couple has been.

I am happy to lambast those "true bigots" if you point me at them. In the meantime, idiots like these pizza parlor owners, who stupidly think the teachings of Jesus have something to do with who people have sex with or marry, should bear the brunt of their own moronic comments.

I dont know you. I just know you were sort of, kind of, ambiguously, and passively, defending some dumb bigots who are deservedly getting mocked mercilessly. No sympathy here for them, or you, to the extent you want to defend them.

I'm pointing out that the penalty they've siffered is excessive in both scope and accusation. But whatever makes you feel better I suppose.

What penalty? This is a product of their own actions.

As far as I can tell their actions were claiming they wouldn't wabt to cater a gay wedding but would have no objection to serving pizza in their restaurant to a gay couple. That because they are not in favor of gay marriage they wouldn't want to participate in a gay wedding. Is this accurate?

Sounds like the free market at work. Any crimes committed?

 

[CowboysFromHell]

My point was that, as a Christian, it's incumbent upon me to be the loudest voice against the gay bashing high school jock or the rural rube threatening to burn down the gay bar. It would seem disingenuous of me to turn a blind eye to those things because they are wrong, and "my group" is responsible.

Liberals in the FFA consistently turn a blind eye to the most horrific actions of the liberal groups and instead point the finger at the other side. If gay groups are putting pronographic pictures out there in protest, well good for them right? I mean, just look at what Jethro is doing in Podunk!

False equivalences seem to be a common response. The most horrific actions committed by liberal groups (especially in this case) are no where near the horrific actions on the other side. What happens to the gay kids who get bullied? They commit suicide in several cases, severe depression and psychological issues for life in many more. The pizza place will have a small bump in the road and will be doing just fine two months from now. I see your point, but don't make it seem like all actions are equal. You can also argue that the left is being intolerant of conscious CHOICES (religion) while the right is intolerant of attributes which are not a choice (race, sexual orientation).

In all fairness, a case could be made that religion isn't always a conscious choice.

How so? Are people born religious? I was raised and indoctrinated into religion, but I made a choice to reject it. When is it not?

It was a bit tongue in cheek, but it is funny how the indoctrination works. The place you are born has a large influence on the religion you get indoctrinated into. And I think there are plenty of people on the bottom end of the bell curve who don't have the wits to question it, thereby dooming them to lifelong association.

 

[mr roboto]

Mr. Roboto, your objection represents the evolution of our culture, which has not taken hold all the way.

If the pizza place refused to cater an interracial marriage, you would regard that as bigotry. But 40 years ago you might not have; you might have regarded it as a perfectly legitimate point of view, even if you didn't agree with it.

40 years from now, probably much less, anyone who objects to gay marriage will be regarded as expressing a backwards, bigoted view. But right now we're still in flux, and some people still think such a view is legitimate- mostly older people.

Mr. Roboto, in 2012, timschtrotner had the same position as you do now, but see how he has evolved in only 3 years. Tim argued endlessly with me that supporting politicians who want to pass legislation banning gay marriages isnt supporting bigots and bigoted legislation....when it obviously is to anyone with any sense or logic.

Luckily, Tim gave up his bigotry support, it seems. You should consider it.

You don't know anything about my political beliefs regarding gay marriage. I'm sorry to tell you this but you jump to conclusions inappropriately here. I believe that in our constitutional democracy gay people should be allowed to legally join and call it a marriage under the laws of our country. As a Christian, I would not adopt the policy that this pizza restaurant has adopted. I am in equity investor and full-time employee of a small company who has employees and licensed partners who are gay. The founder and CEO of our company is also a Christian man and has no problem hiring or licensing the rights to our business to gay people.But my personal religious beliefs on human sexuality do not define me as a bigot. I also do not believe that from what I've read, this pizza restaurant in Indiana has proven to us that they are in fact a bigoted couple. They may very well be bigots and they very well may be embarrassingly prejudiced against gay people.

My concern however is that we are fighting strongly for the rights of gay people to be equals and to be married and to be given all of the legal and consumer protections that any other group has under the law yet we seek to restrict private business owners from conscientiously objecting to something that is against their religious believes that does not demonstrably discriminate or cause harm to anybody else.

I will continue to be open-minded on this topic because I am conflicted on this issue. But I am absolutely certain that I'm embarrassed by the collateral damage that this business and others have suffered for trying to be reasonable and attempting to be honest about their own religious beliefs and how they would interact with providing services to those who they may have a strong disagreement with. My final comment is that I think this pizza restaurant is taking the brunt of a conversation and there are plenty of true bigots that should be lambasted and embarrassed far more than this couple has been.

I am happy to lambast those "true bigots" if you point me at them. In the meantime, idiots like these pizza parlor owners, who stupidly think the teachings of Jesus have something to do with who people have sex with or marry, should bear the brunt of their own moronic comments.

I dont know you. I just know you were sort of, kind of, ambiguously, and passively, defending some dumb bigots who are deservedly getting mocked mercilessly. No sympathy here for them, or you, to the extent you want to defend them.

I'm pointing out that the penalty they've siffered is excessive in both scope and accusation. But whatever makes you feel better I suppose.

What penalty? This is a product of their own actions.

As far as I can tell their actions were claiming they wouldn't wabt to cater a gay wedding but would have no objection to serving pizza in their restaurant to a gay couple. That because they are not in favor of gay marriage they wouldn't want to participate in a gay wedding. Is this accurate?

Sounds like the free market at work. Any crimes committed?

So yes? My understanding of their 'actions' is correct? If so, the backlash they received is disproportionate to their actions in my opinion. Do you disagree?

 

[CowboysFromHell]

Mr. Roboto, your objection represents the evolution of our culture, which has not taken hold all the way.

If the pizza place refused to cater an interracial marriage, you would regard that as bigotry. But 40 years ago you might not have; you might have regarded it as a perfectly legitimate point of view, even if you didn't agree with it.

40 years from now, probably much less, anyone who objects to gay marriage will be regarded as expressing a backwards, bigoted view. But right now we're still in flux, and some people still think such a view is legitimate- mostly older people.

Mr. Roboto, in 2012, timschtrotner had the same position as you do now, but see how he has evolved in only 3 years. Tim argued endlessly with me that supporting politicians who want to pass legislation banning gay marriages isnt supporting bigots and bigoted legislation....when it obviously is to anyone with any sense or logic.

Luckily, Tim gave up his bigotry support, it seems. You should consider it.

You don't know anything about my political beliefs regarding gay marriage. I'm sorry to tell you this but you jump to conclusions inappropriately here. I believe that in our constitutional democracy gay people should be allowed to legally join and call it a marriage under the laws of our country. As a Christian, I would not adopt the policy that this pizza restaurant has adopted. I am in equity investor and full-time employee of a small company who has employees and licensed partners who are gay. The founder and CEO of our company is also a Christian man and has no problem hiring or licensing the rights to our business to gay people.But my personal religious beliefs on human sexuality do not define me as a bigot. I also do not believe that from what I've read, this pizza restaurant in Indiana has proven to us that they are in fact a bigoted couple. They may very well be bigots and they very well may be embarrassingly prejudiced against gay people.

My concern however is that we are fighting strongly for the rights of gay people to be equals and to be married and to be given all of the legal and consumer protections that any other group has under the law yet we seek to restrict private business owners from conscientiously objecting to something that is against their religious believes that does not demonstrably discriminate or cause harm to anybody else.

I will continue to be open-minded on this topic because I am conflicted on this issue. But I am absolutely certain that I'm embarrassed by the collateral damage that this business and others have suffered for trying to be reasonable and attempting to be honest about their own religious beliefs and how they would interact with providing services to those who they may have a strong disagreement with. My final comment is that I think this pizza restaurant is taking the brunt of a conversation and there are plenty of true bigots that should be lambasted and embarrassed far more than this couple has been.

I am happy to lambast those "true bigots" if you point me at them. In the meantime, idiots like these pizza parlor owners, who stupidly think the teachings of Jesus have something to do with who people have sex with or marry, should bear the brunt of their own moronic comments.

I dont know you. I just know you were sort of, kind of, ambiguously, and passively, defending some dumb bigots who are deservedly getting mocked mercilessly. No sympathy here for them, or you, to the extent you want to defend them.

I'm pointing out that the penalty they've siffered is excessive in both scope and accusation. But whatever makes you feel better I suppose.

What penalty? Being made fun of for being bigots on the internets? Maybe people wont be so comfortable being bigots and calling their bigotry "religious beliefs" in the future if more people call them bigots to their faces publicly and contemptuously, like what is happening to these people.

Just something to think about. In 1959 a Virginia judge felt very comfortable upholding Virginia's anti-miscegenation laws because it was God's law, writing

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.

and he sentenced a man and his wife to prison terms for being married, sentences suspended if they left the state of Virginia. It took the US Supreme Court and years and years of litigation to finally get those types of laws thrown out. Maybe if everyone in the town had gone over to the Judge's street and called him a scumbag racist bigot hiding his racism and bigotry behind his "religious beliefs", things might have happened a little faster.

Like I said, no nuance, grey area or sympathy here.

All except the last sentence.

 

[Todd Andrews]

Mr. Roboto, your objection represents the evolution of our culture, which has not taken hold all the way.

If the pizza place refused to cater an interracial marriage, you would regard that as bigotry. But 40 years ago you might not have; you might have regarded it as a perfectly legitimate point of view, even if you didn't agree with it.

40 years from now, probably much less, anyone who objects to gay marriage will be regarded as expressing a backwards, bigoted view. But right now we're still in flux, and some people still think such a view is legitimate- mostly older people.

Mr. Roboto, in 2012, timschtrotner had the same position as you do now, but see how he has evolved in only 3 years. Tim argued endlessly with me that supporting politicians who want to pass legislation banning gay marriages isnt supporting bigots and bigoted legislation....when it obviously is to anyone with any sense or logic.

Luckily, Tim gave up his bigotry support, it seems. You should consider it.

You don't know anything about my political beliefs regarding gay marriage. I'm sorry to tell you this but you jump to conclusions inappropriately here. I believe that in our constitutional democracy gay people should be allowed to legally join and call it a marriage under the laws of our country. As a Christian, I would not adopt the policy that this pizza restaurant has adopted. I am in equity investor and full-time employee of a small company who has employees and licensed partners who are gay. The founder and CEO of our company is also a Christian man and has no problem hiring or licensing the rights to our business to gay people.But my personal religious beliefs on human sexuality do not define me as a bigot. I also do not believe that from what I've read, this pizza restaurant in Indiana has proven to us that they are in fact a bigoted couple. They may very well be bigots and they very well may be embarrassingly prejudiced against gay people.

My concern however is that we are fighting strongly for the rights of gay people to be equals and to be married and to be given all of the legal and consumer protections that any other group has under the law yet we seek to restrict private business owners from conscientiously objecting to something that is against their religious believes that does not demonstrably discriminate or cause harm to anybody else.

I will continue to be open-minded on this topic because I am conflicted on this issue. But I am absolutely certain that I'm embarrassed by the collateral damage that this business and others have suffered for trying to be reasonable and attempting to be honest about their own religious beliefs and how they would interact with providing services to those who they may have a strong disagreement with. My final comment is that I think this pizza restaurant is taking the brunt of a conversation and there are plenty of true bigots that should be lambasted and embarrassed far more than this couple has been.

I am happy to lambast those "true bigots" if you point me at them. In the meantime, idiots like these pizza parlor owners, who stupidly think the teachings of Jesus have something to do with who people have sex with or marry, should bear the brunt of their own moronic comments.

I dont know you. I just know you were sort of, kind of, ambiguously, and passively, defending some dumb bigots who are deservedly getting mocked mercilessly. No sympathy here for them, or you, to the extent you want to defend them.

I'm pointing out that the penalty they've siffered is excessive in both scope and accusation. But whatever makes you feel better I suppose.

What penalty? Being made fun of for being bigots on the internets? Maybe people wont be so comfortable being bigots and calling their bigotry "religious beliefs" in the future if more people call them bigots to their faces publicly and contemptuously, like what is happening to these people.

Just something to think about. In 1959 a Virginia judge felt very comfortable upholding Virginia's anti-miscegenation laws because it was God's law, writing

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.

and he sentenced a man and his wife to prison terms for being married, sentences suspended if they left the state of Virginia. It took the US Supreme Court and years and years of litigation to finally get those types of laws thrown out. Maybe if everyone in the town had gone over to the Judge's street and called him a scumbag racist bigot hiding his racism and bigotry behind his "religious beliefs", things might have happened a little faster.

Like I said, no nuance, grey area or sympathy here.

All except the last sentence.

I am rather harsh, I will admit.

 

[squistion]

If I had a struggling business with a crappy product, I might consider making a controversial public statement simply to get free publicity, to have random people donate money to a gofundme page, and to drive customers to my business who want to make a political point by purchasing my product. Sure, it's a risk, but if I'm sucking wind anyway, it might be worth a shot.

Not saying that is what happened here, but it could very well be a savvy business move.

That is the internet rumor with the GoFundMe page. That Memories Pizza was on the verge of bankruptcy and came out with this scheme to bail themselves out by having a TV interview where they announce they intend to discriminate against gays and then play the victim and reap the windfall from donations and local support when they reopen.

That said, it is just a rumor and will probably turn out as valid as the internet report that the Germanwings pilot had converted to Islam shortly before he crashed the plane.

 

[CowboysFromHell]

Mr. Roboto, your objection represents the evolution of our culture, which has not taken hold all the way.

If the pizza place refused to cater an interracial marriage, you would regard that as bigotry. But 40 years ago you might not have; you might have regarded it as a perfectly legitimate point of view, even if you didn't agree with it.

40 years from now, probably much less, anyone who objects to gay marriage will be regarded as expressing a backwards, bigoted view. But right now we're still in flux, and some people still think such a view is legitimate- mostly older people.

Mr. Roboto, in 2012, timschtrotner had the same position as you do now, but see how he has evolved in only 3 years. Tim argued endlessly with me that supporting politicians who want to pass legislation banning gay marriages isnt supporting bigots and bigoted legislation....when it obviously is to anyone with any sense or logic.

Luckily, Tim gave up his bigotry support, it seems. You should consider it.

You don't know anything about my political beliefs regarding gay marriage. I'm sorry to tell you this but you jump to conclusions inappropriately here. I believe that in our constitutional democracy gay people should be allowed to legally join and call it a marriage under the laws of our country. As a Christian, I would not adopt the policy that this pizza restaurant has adopted. I am in equity investor and full-time employee of a small company who has employees and licensed partners who are gay. The founder and CEO of our company is also a Christian man and has no problem hiring or licensing the rights to our business to gay people.But my personal religious beliefs on human sexuality do not define me as a bigot. I also do not believe that from what I've read, this pizza restaurant in Indiana has proven to us that they are in fact a bigoted couple. They may very well be bigots and they very well may be embarrassingly prejudiced against gay people.

My concern however is that we are fighting strongly for the rights of gay people to be equals and to be married and to be given all of the legal and consumer protections that any other group has under the law yet we seek to restrict private business owners from conscientiously objecting to something that is against their religious believes that does not demonstrably discriminate or cause harm to anybody else.

I will continue to be open-minded on this topic because I am conflicted on this issue. But I am absolutely certain that I'm embarrassed by the collateral damage that this business and others have suffered for trying to be reasonable and attempting to be honest about their own religious beliefs and how they would interact with providing services to those who they may have a strong disagreement with. My final comment is that I think this pizza restaurant is taking the brunt of a conversation and there are plenty of true bigots that should be lambasted and embarrassed far more than this couple has been.

I am happy to lambast those "true bigots" if you point me at them. In the meantime, idiots like these pizza parlor owners, who stupidly think the teachings of Jesus have something to do with who people have sex with or marry, should bear the brunt of their own moronic comments.

I dont know you. I just know you were sort of, kind of, ambiguously, and passively, defending some dumb bigots who are deservedly getting mocked mercilessly. No sympathy here for them, or you, to the extent you want to defend them.

I'm pointing out that the penalty they've siffered is excessive in both scope and accusation. But whatever makes you feel better I suppose.

What penalty? Being made fun of for being bigots on the internets? Maybe people wont be so comfortable being bigots and calling their bigotry "religious beliefs" in the future if more people call them bigots to their faces publicly and contemptuously, like what is happening to these people.

Just something to think about. In 1959 a Virginia judge felt very comfortable upholding Virginia's anti-miscegenation laws because it was God's law, writing

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.

and he sentenced a man and his wife to prison terms for being married, sentences suspended if they left the state of Virginia. It took the US Supreme Court and years and years of litigation to finally get those types of laws thrown out. Maybe if everyone in the town had gone over to the Judge's street and called him a scumbag racist bigot hiding his racism and bigotry behind his "religious beliefs", things might have happened a little faster.

Like I said, no nuance, grey area or sympathy here.

All except the last sentence.

I am rather harsh, I will admit.

 

[drummer]

So has the Christian Right Wing lost their way of life yet?

 

[chauncey]

I just heard about the internet warriors attacking this pizza place on yelp and around the web. It is a pretty strange world we live in when the hysterical masses can essentially ruin the reputation of a business just because they disagree with their religious beliefs. Keep in mind nobody has actually been discriminated against, all of the hysteria is over hypothetical situations that might occur. And then, this business uses the same tool (social media) that is destroying them to raise tens of thousands of dollars overnight from supporters. That is more money than they probably profit in a year! And now the internet warriors are taking their fight to the people who are donating. Next thing you know CNN will be running a scroll at the bottom of the screen with the names of people who are donating money / hate gay people. Where does this end?

This Indiana situation is really bringing out the hypocrites on both sides of the issue.

Some of the protesters of this Indiana Law have a lot in common with the Ferguson protesters. They may have a valid message but their delivery is going to turn a lot of people away in disgust.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Refusing to cater a gay wedding = bigotry?

Of course it is.

 

[drummer]

I just heard about the internet warriors attacking this pizza place on yelp and around the web. It is a pretty strange world we live in when the hysterical masses can essentially ruin the reputation of a business just because they disagree with their religious beliefs. Keep in mind nobody has actually been discriminated against, all of the hysteria is over hypothetical situations that might occur. And then, this business uses the same tool (social media) that is destroying them to raise tens of thousands of dollars overnight from supporters. That is more money than they probably profit in a year! And now the internet warriors are taking their fight to the people who are donating. Next thing you know CNN will be running a scroll at the bottom of the screen with the names of people who are donating money / hate gay people. Where does this end?

This Indiana situation is really bringing out the hypocrites on both sides of the issue.

Some of the protesters of this Indiana Law have a lot in common with the Ferguson protesters. They may have a valid message but their delivery is going to turn a lot of people away in disgust.

Holy freakin'

 

[squistion]

Next thing you know CNN will be running a scroll at the bottom of the screen with the names of people who are donating money / hate gay people. Where does this end?

Yes, I am sure that will happen.

All those $10-$25 GoFundMe donations from good Christian folk who were just trying to do the right thing and help save Memories Pizza from the orchestrated attack of left wing media will have their names broadcast by CNN to make an example of them for having the audacity to stand up to the Big Gay.

Indeed, where does this end?

 

[drummer]

HELP US SAVE CHRISTIAN PIZZA FROM GAYS EATING CHRISTIAN PIZZA BECAUSE IT AIN'T CHRISTIAN PIZZA ANYMORE WHEN A GAY PERSON EATS OUR GOD GIVEN RIGHT OF CHRISTIAN PIZZA

 

[drummer]

Since Joe B is Christian, does he feel that he reserves the right to refuse gays from eating his BBQ?