Boycott Indiana? (1 Viewer)

The Commish said:

CowboysFromHell said:

sho nuff said:

CowboysFromHell said:

I do think it's an interesting question on how to deal with these two scenarios:

1. Ultra-religious baker who is offended by a gay couple getting married. Does he/she have to bake the wedding cake for them?

2. Gay person working at Kinkos who is offended by an ultra-religious person who wants to print signs that say "God Hates ####". Does the gay Kinkos employee have to print the sign?

i.e. Should we have laws that force people to put aside their personal beliefs and provide goods and services to any and all that want them? Or, should we allow business owners to discriminate and only serve those that they don't personally find offensive?

Again, I think we've seen that the latter fails. Can you imagine planning a road trip across America and having to avoid certain states because they won't fill up your tank or sell you lunch because you're traveling with a gay companion, or a black companion, or a Muslim???

Click to expand...

My problem with 1 (not my only problem...but one of them) is that the ultra religious baker likely does not turn down someone who has committed other sins and makes their cake but will typically turn down gays. I doubt the baker is doing background checks to make sure she is not making a cake for an adulterer. Does she make cakes for gluttons too? Well, probably...it is cake after all.

The gay kinkos employee could likely appeal to his/her boss and say he/she would rather not make such copies. How it works after that...I don't know.

Click to expand...

I think to be consistent, if we're going to demand that the baker put aside his/her beliefs and bake the cake for the gay couple, we have to also ask the gay Kinkos employee to print the sign. UNLESS its determined that the phrase "God Hates ####" is considered "hate speech". I guess we get into a freedom of speech discussion at that point, and whether or not and/or where the lines should be drawn. But, again, to be consistent, we're going to demand, via law, that everyone put aside their personal beliefs in most instances and serve everyone. I like the ruling that Saints posted out of NM. We all have to compromise a little. That's part of living in a free society.

Click to expand...

Ignoring the small straw man here (the notion that one needs to avoid entire states) I don't think federal or state legislation is necessary in either case. If a business owner doesn't want a certain demogrpahic's money, that's their decision...albeit probably a poor decision. On a similar note, if one doesn't want to help a customer because of their hate speech, that's between that individual and their boss. At that point it's a customer service and public perception issue. Let the market decide what's appropriate.

Click to expand...

The Commish said:

CowboysFromHell said:

sho nuff said:

CowboysFromHell said:

I do think it's an interesting question on how to deal with these two scenarios:

1. Ultra-religious baker who is offended by a gay couple getting married. Does he/she have to bake the wedding cake for them?

2. Gay person working at Kinkos who is offended by an ultra-religious person who wants to print signs that say "God Hates ####". Does the gay Kinkos employee have to print the sign?

i.e. Should we have laws that force people to put aside their personal beliefs and provide goods and services to any and all that want them? Or, should we allow business owners to discriminate and only serve those that they don't personally find offensive?

Again, I think we've seen that the latter fails. Can you imagine planning a road trip across America and having to avoid certain states because they won't fill up your tank or sell you lunch because you're traveling with a gay companion, or a black companion, or a Muslim???

Click to expand...

My problem with 1 (not my only problem...but one of them) is that the ultra religious baker likely does not turn down someone who has committed other sins and makes their cake but will typically turn down gays. I doubt the baker is doing background checks to make sure she is not making a cake for an adulterer. Does she make cakes for gluttons too? Well, probably...it is cake after all.

The gay kinkos employee could likely appeal to his/her boss and say he/she would rather not make such copies. How it works after that...I don't know.

Click to expand...

I think to be consistent, if we're going to demand that the baker put aside his/her beliefs and bake the cake for the gay couple, we have to also ask the gay Kinkos employee to print the sign. UNLESS its determined that the phrase "God Hates ####" is considered "hate speech". I guess we get into a freedom of speech discussion at that point, and whether or not and/or where the lines should be drawn. But, again, to be consistent, we're going to demand, via law, that everyone put aside their personal beliefs in most instances and serve everyone. I like the ruling that Saints posted out of NM. We all have to compromise a little. That's part of living in a free society.

Click to expand...

Ignoring the small straw man here (the notion that one needs to avoid entire states) I don't think federal or state legislation is necessary in either case. If a business owner doesn't want a certain demogrpahic's money, that's their decision...albeit probably a poor decision. On a similar note, if one doesn't want to help a customer because of their hate speech, that's between that individual and their boss. At that point it's a customer service and public perception issue. Let the market decide what's appropriate.

Click to expand...

greenroom said:

Will be interesting to see what happens if someone of Muslim faith or non christian faith, used this law to discriminate against Christians. Will they get the same protection that Christians will get?

Click to expand...

CowboysFromHell said:

The Commish said:

CowboysFromHell said:

sho nuff said:

CowboysFromHell said:

I do think it's an interesting question on how to deal with these two scenarios:

1. Ultra-religious baker who is offended by a gay couple getting married. Does he/she have to bake the wedding cake for them?

2. Gay person working at Kinkos who is offended by an ultra-religious person who wants to print signs that say "God Hates ####". Does the gay Kinkos employee have to print the sign?

i.e. Should we have laws that force people to put aside their personal beliefs and provide goods and services to any and all that want them? Or, should we allow business owners to discriminate and only serve those that they don't personally find offensive?

Again, I think we've seen that the latter fails. Can you imagine planning a road trip across America and having to avoid certain states because they won't fill up your tank or sell you lunch because you're traveling with a gay companion, or a black companion, or a Muslim???

Click to expand...

My problem with 1 (not my only problem...but one of them) is that the ultra religious baker likely does not turn down someone who has committed other sins and makes their cake but will typically turn down gays. I doubt the baker is doing background checks to make sure she is not making a cake for an adulterer. Does she make cakes for gluttons too? Well, probably...it is cake after all.

The gay kinkos employee could likely appeal to his/her boss and say he/she would rather not make such copies. How it works after that...I don't know.

Click to expand...

I think to be consistent, if we're going to demand that the baker put aside his/her beliefs and bake the cake for the gay couple, we have to also ask the gay Kinkos employee to print the sign. UNLESS its determined that the phrase "God Hates ####" is considered "hate speech". I guess we get into a freedom of speech discussion at that point, and whether or not and/or where the lines should be drawn. But, again, to be consistent, we're going to demand, via law, that everyone put aside their personal beliefs in most instances and serve everyone. I like the ruling that Saints posted out of NM. We all have to compromise a little. That's part of living in a free society.

Click to expand...

Ignoring the small straw man here (the notion that one needs to avoid entire states) I don't think federal or state legislation is necessary in either case. If a business owner doesn't want a certain demogrpahic's money, that's their decision...albeit probably a poor decision. On a similar note, if one doesn't want to help a customer because of their hate speech, that's between that individual and their boss. At that point it's a customer service and public perception issue. Let the market decide what's appropriate.

Click to expand...

So, you'd be OK if a small roadside diner in East Bum####, Texas had a sign out front that said "Whites Only"?

Click to expand...

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

CowboysFromHell said:

sho nuff said:

CowboysFromHell said:

I do think it's an interesting question on how to deal with these two scenarios:

1. Ultra-religious baker who is offended by a gay couple getting married. Does he/she have to bake the wedding cake for them?

2. Gay person working at Kinkos who is offended by an ultra-religious person who wants to print signs that say "God Hates ####". Does the gay Kinkos employee have to print the sign?

i.e. Should we have laws that force people to put aside their personal beliefs and provide goods and services to any and all that want them? Or, should we allow business owners to discriminate and only serve those that they don't personally find offensive?

Again, I think we've seen that the latter fails. Can you imagine planning a road trip across America and having to avoid certain states because they won't fill up your tank or sell you lunch because you're traveling with a gay companion, or a black companion, or a Muslim???

Click to expand...

My problem with 1 (not my only problem...but one of them) is that the ultra religious baker likely does not turn down someone who has committed other sins and makes their cake but will typically turn down gays. I doubt the baker is doing background checks to make sure she is not making a cake for an adulterer. Does she make cakes for gluttons too? Well, probably...it is cake after all.

The gay kinkos employee could likely appeal to his/her boss and say he/she would rather not make such copies. How it works after that...I don't know.

Click to expand...

I think to be consistent, if we're going to demand that the baker put aside his/her beliefs and bake the cake for the gay couple, we have to also ask the gay Kinkos employee to print the sign. UNLESS its determined that the phrase "God Hates ####" is considered "hate speech". I guess we get into a freedom of speech discussion at that point, and whether or not and/or where the lines should be drawn. But, again, to be consistent, we're going to demand, via law, that everyone put aside their personal beliefs in most instances and serve everyone. I like the ruling that Saints posted out of NM. We all have to compromise a little. That's part of living in a free society.

Click to expand...

Ignoring the small straw man here (the notion that one needs to avoid entire states) I don't think federal or state legislation is necessary in either case. If a business owner doesn't want a certain demogrpahic's money, that's their decision...albeit probably a poor decision. On a similar note, if one doesn't want to help a customer because of their hate speech, that's between that individual and their boss. At that point it's a customer service and public perception issue. Let the market decide what's appropriate.

Click to expand...

The market has a pretty ####ty track record.

Click to expand...

The Commish said:

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

CowboysFromHell said:

sho nuff said:

CowboysFromHell said:

I do think it's an interesting question on how to deal with these two scenarios:

1. Ultra-religious baker who is offended by a gay couple getting married. Does he/she have to bake the wedding cake for them?

2. Gay person working at Kinkos who is offended by an ultra-religious person who wants to print signs that say "God Hates ####". Does the gay Kinkos employee have to print the sign?

i.e. Should we have laws that force people to put aside their personal beliefs and provide goods and services to any and all that want them? Or, should we allow business owners to discriminate and only serve those that they don't personally find offensive?

Again, I think we've seen that the latter fails. Can you imagine planning a road trip across America and having to avoid certain states because they won't fill up your tank or sell you lunch because you're traveling with a gay companion, or a black companion, or a Muslim???

Click to expand...

My problem with 1 (not my only problem...but one of them) is that the ultra religious baker likely does not turn down someone who has committed other sins and makes their cake but will typically turn down gays. I doubt the baker is doing background checks to make sure she is not making a cake for an adulterer. Does she make cakes for gluttons too? Well, probably...it is cake after all.

The gay kinkos employee could likely appeal to his/her boss and say he/she would rather not make such copies. How it works after that...I don't know.

Click to expand...

I think to be consistent, if we're going to demand that the baker put aside his/her beliefs and bake the cake for the gay couple, we have to also ask the gay Kinkos employee to print the sign. UNLESS its determined that the phrase "God Hates ####" is considered "hate speech". I guess we get into a freedom of speech discussion at that point, and whether or not and/or where the lines should be drawn. But, again, to be consistent, we're going to demand, via law, that everyone put aside their personal beliefs in most instances and serve everyone. I like the ruling that Saints posted out of NM. We all have to compromise a little. That's part of living in a free society.

Click to expand...

Ignoring the small straw man here (the notion that one needs to avoid entire states) I don't think federal or state legislation is necessary in either case. If a business owner doesn't want a certain demogrpahic's money, that's their decision...albeit probably a poor decision. On a similar note, if one doesn't want to help a customer because of their hate speech, that's between that individual and their boss. At that point it's a customer service and public perception issue. Let the market decide what's appropriate.

Click to expand...

The market has a pretty ####ty track record.

Click to expand...

Really? Someone brought up CFA a few posts back. The market seemed to work just fine in that case. Was it ####ty back in the day? Of course. Times are changing and technology is a powerful tool

Click to expand...

greenroom said:

Will be interesting to see what happens if someone of Muslim faith or non christian faith, used this law to discriminate against Christians. Will they get the same protection that Christians will get?

Click to expand...

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

CowboysFromHell said:

sho nuff said:

CowboysFromHell said:

I do think it's an interesting question on how to deal with these two scenarios:

1. Ultra-religious baker who is offended by a gay couple getting married. Does he/she have to bake the wedding cake for them?

2. Gay person working at Kinkos who is offended by an ultra-religious person who wants to print signs that say "God Hates ####". Does the gay Kinkos employee have to print the sign?

i.e. Should we have laws that force people to put aside their personal beliefs and provide goods and services to any and all that want them? Or, should we allow business owners to discriminate and only serve those that they don't personally find offensive?

Again, I think we've seen that the latter fails. Can you imagine planning a road trip across America and having to avoid certain states because they won't fill up your tank or sell you lunch because you're traveling with a gay companion, or a black companion, or a Muslim???

Click to expand...

My problem with 1 (not my only problem...but one of them) is that the ultra religious baker likely does not turn down someone who has committed other sins and makes their cake but will typically turn down gays. I doubt the baker is doing background checks to make sure she is not making a cake for an adulterer. Does she make cakes for gluttons too? Well, probably...it is cake after all.

The gay kinkos employee could likely appeal to his/her boss and say he/she would rather not make such copies. How it works after that...I don't know.

Click to expand...

I think to be consistent, if we're going to demand that the baker put aside his/her beliefs and bake the cake for the gay couple, we have to also ask the gay Kinkos employee to print the sign. UNLESS its determined that the phrase "God Hates ####" is considered "hate speech". I guess we get into a freedom of speech discussion at that point, and whether or not and/or where the lines should be drawn. But, again, to be consistent, we're going to demand, via law, that everyone put aside their personal beliefs in most instances and serve everyone. I like the ruling that Saints posted out of NM. We all have to compromise a little. That's part of living in a free society.

Click to expand...

Ignoring the small straw man here (the notion that one needs to avoid entire states) I don't think federal or state legislation is necessary in either case. If a business owner doesn't want a certain demogrpahic's money, that's their decision...albeit probably a poor decision. On a similar note, if one doesn't want to help a customer because of their hate speech, that's between that individual and their boss. At that point it's a customer service and public perception issue. Let the market decide what's appropriate.

Click to expand...

The market has a pretty ####ty track record.

Click to expand...

Really? Someone brought up CFA a few posts back. The market seemed to work just fine in that case. Was it ####ty back in the day? Of course. Times are changing and technology is a powerful tool

Click to expand...

You're a fool if you don't think there are places where segregated businesses would be welcome and supported.

And your solution to the effected people in that area would be to shrug and declare that the market has spoken.

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

My grandfather was unable to live in the house he wanted because the community, in west Los Angeles, was "restricted"- Jews were not allowed. No amount of free market ended this discrimination because there weren't enough Jews to make an economic difference and nobody else was willing to boycott. In the end the law had to be changed prohibiting such discrimination.

Click to expand...

pantagrapher said:

You're a fool if you don't think there are places where segregated businesses would be welcome and supported.

And your solution to the effected people in that area would be to shrug and declare that the market has spoken.

Click to expand...

Leroy Hoard said:

Ditkaless Wonders said:

Without making any effort to boycott Indiana I have not been there in 37 years.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The Commish said:

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

CowboysFromHell said:

sho nuff said:

CowboysFromHell said:

I do think it's an interesting question on how to deal with these two scenarios:

1. Ultra-religious baker who is offended by a gay couple getting married. Does he/she have to bake the wedding cake for them?

2. Gay person working at Kinkos who is offended by an ultra-religious person who wants to print signs that say "God Hates ####". Does the gay Kinkos employee have to print the sign?

i.e. Should we have laws that force people to put aside their personal beliefs and provide goods and services to any and all that want them? Or, should we allow business owners to discriminate and only serve those that they don't personally find offensive?

Again, I think we've seen that the latter fails. Can you imagine planning a road trip across America and having to avoid certain states because they won't fill up your tank or sell you lunch because you're traveling with a gay companion, or a black companion, or a Muslim???

Click to expand...

My problem with 1 (not my only problem...but one of them) is that the ultra religious baker likely does not turn down someone who has committed other sins and makes their cake but will typically turn down gays. I doubt the baker is doing background checks to make sure she is not making a cake for an adulterer. Does she make cakes for gluttons too? Well, probably...it is cake after all.

The gay kinkos employee could likely appeal to his/her boss and say he/she would rather not make such copies. How it works after that...I don't know.

Click to expand...

I think to be consistent, if we're going to demand that the baker put aside his/her beliefs and bake the cake for the gay couple, we have to also ask the gay Kinkos employee to print the sign. UNLESS its determined that the phrase "God Hates ####" is considered "hate speech". I guess we get into a freedom of speech discussion at that point, and whether or not and/or where the lines should be drawn. But, again, to be consistent, we're going to demand, via law, that everyone put aside their personal beliefs in most instances and serve everyone. I like the ruling that Saints posted out of NM. We all have to compromise a little. That's part of living in a free society.

Click to expand...

Ignoring the small straw man here (the notion that one needs to avoid entire states) I don't think federal or state legislation is necessary in either case. If a business owner doesn't want a certain demogrpahic's money, that's their decision...albeit probably a poor decision. On a similar note, if one doesn't want to help a customer because of their hate speech, that's between that individual and their boss. At that point it's a customer service and public perception issue. Let the market decide what's appropriate.

Click to expand...

The market has a pretty ####ty track record.

Click to expand...

Really? Someone brought up CFA a few posts back. The market seemed to work just fine in that case. Was it ####ty back in the day? Of course. Times are changing and technology is a powerful tool

Click to expand...

You're a fool if you don't think there are places where segregated businesses would be welcome and supported.

And your solution to the effected people in that area would be to shrug and declare that the market has spoken.

Click to expand...

Sure, in small pockets this will obviously be true that's why I didn't say that. The difference today is that we'd know about them and know about them quickly. I have faith that the collective people of this country would do the right thing once they found out about it.

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

My grandfather was unable to live in the house he wanted because the community, in west Los Angeles, was "restricted"- Jews were not allowed. No amount of free market ended this discrimination because there weren't enough Jews to make an economic difference and nobody else was willing to boycott. In the end the law had to be changed prohibiting such discrimination.

Click to expand...

SaintsInDome2006 said:

Leroy Hoard said:

Ditkaless Wonders said:

Without making any effort to boycott Indiana I have not been there in 37 years.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Really, someone needs to start with a good list of reasons to go to Indiana in the first place.

Click to expand...

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

CowboysFromHell said:

sho nuff said:

CowboysFromHell said:

I do think it's an interesting question on how to deal with these two scenarios:

1. Ultra-religious baker who is offended by a gay couple getting married. Does he/she have to bake the wedding cake for them?

2. Gay person working at Kinkos who is offended by an ultra-religious person who wants to print signs that say "God Hates ####". Does the gay Kinkos employee have to print the sign?

i.e. Should we have laws that force people to put aside their personal beliefs and provide goods and services to any and all that want them? Or, should we allow business owners to discriminate and only serve those that they don't personally find offensive?

Again, I think we've seen that the latter fails. Can you imagine planning a road trip across America and having to avoid certain states because they won't fill up your tank or sell you lunch because you're traveling with a gay companion, or a black companion, or a Muslim???

Click to expand...

My problem with 1 (not my only problem...but one of them) is that the ultra religious baker likely does not turn down someone who has committed other sins and makes their cake but will typically turn down gays. I doubt the baker is doing background checks to make sure she is not making a cake for an adulterer. Does she make cakes for gluttons too? Well, probably...it is cake after all.

The gay kinkos employee could likely appeal to his/her boss and say he/she would rather not make such copies. How it works after that...I don't know.

Click to expand...

I think to be consistent, if we're going to demand that the baker put aside his/her beliefs and bake the cake for the gay couple, we have to also ask the gay Kinkos employee to print the sign. UNLESS its determined that the phrase "God Hates ####" is considered "hate speech". I guess we get into a freedom of speech discussion at that point, and whether or not and/or where the lines should be drawn. But, again, to be consistent, we're going to demand, via law, that everyone put aside their personal beliefs in most instances and serve everyone. I like the ruling that Saints posted out of NM. We all have to compromise a little. That's part of living in a free society.

Click to expand...

Ignoring the small straw man here (the notion that one needs to avoid entire states) I don't think federal or state legislation is necessary in either case. If a business owner doesn't want a certain demogrpahic's money, that's their decision...albeit probably a poor decision. On a similar note, if one doesn't want to help a customer because of their hate speech, that's between that individual and their boss. At that point it's a customer service and public perception issue. Let the market decide what's appropriate.

Click to expand...

The market has a pretty ####ty track record.

Click to expand...

Really? Someone brought up CFA a few posts back. The market seemed to work just fine in that case. Was it ####ty back in the day? Of course. Times are changing and technology is a powerful tool

Click to expand...

You're a fool if you don't think there are places where segregated businesses would be welcome and supported.

And your solution to the effected people in that area would be to shrug and declare that the market has spoken.

Click to expand...

SaintsInDome2006 said:

timschochet said:

My grandfather was unable to live in the house he wanted because the community, in west Los Angeles, was "restricted"- Jews were not allowed. No amount of free market ended this discrimination because there weren't enough Jews to make an economic difference and nobody else was willing to boycott. In the end the law had to be changed prohibiting such discrimination.

Click to expand...

We still have segregated police unions, private clubs, Mardi Gras clubs, etc.

Do gays even want to make some random baker sell them a cake if they don't want to?

Click to expand...

roadkill1292 said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

timschochet said:

My grandfather was unable to live in the house he wanted because the community, in west Los Angeles, was "restricted"- Jews were not allowed. No amount of free market ended this discrimination because there weren't enough Jews to make an economic difference and nobody else was willing to boycott. In the end the law had to be changed prohibiting such discrimination.

Click to expand...

We still have segregated police unions, private clubs, Mardi Gras clubs, etc.

Do gays even want to make some random baker sell them a cake if they don't want to?

Click to expand...

They should be happy sticking with their own kind.

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

My grandfather was unable to live in the house he wanted because the community, in west Los Angeles, was "restricted"- Jews were not allowed. No amount of free market ended this discrimination because there weren't enough Jews to make an economic difference and nobody else was willing to boycott. In the end the law had to be changed prohibiting such discrimination.

Click to expand...

CowboysFromHell said:

pantagrapher said:

You're a fool if you don't think there are places where segregated businesses would be welcome and supported.

And your solution to the effected people in that area would be to shrug and declare that the market has spoken.

Click to expand...

This. Commish, sorry but I think you're solution would be disastrous. You really think the mom n pop businesses in the small towns of the Midwest give a flying crap about their social media profile? There'd be plenty of businesses doing just fine, thank you, in their small pockets of the country, serving their homogeneous local populations. And, outsiders would have to steer clear. Sounds like a great, united America to live in.

Click to expand...

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

My grandfather was unable to live in the house he wanted because the community, in west Los Angeles, was "restricted"- Jews were not allowed. No amount of free market ended this discrimination because there weren't enough Jews to make an economic difference and nobody else was willing to boycott. In the end the law had to be changed prohibiting such discrimination.

Click to expand...

What do you think would happen to a neighborhood like that in today's world if those rules didn't exist?

Click to expand...

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

My grandfather was unable to live in the house he wanted because the community, in west Los Angeles, was "restricted"- Jews were not allowed. No amount of free market ended this discrimination because there weren't enough Jews to make an economic difference and nobody else was willing to boycott. In the end the law had to be changed prohibiting such discrimination.

Click to expand...

What do you think would happen to a neighborhood like that in today's world if those rules didn't exist?

Click to expand...

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

CowboysFromHell said:

sho nuff said:

CowboysFromHell said:

I do think it's an interesting question on how to deal with these two scenarios:

1. Ultra-religious baker who is offended by a gay couple getting married. Does he/she have to bake the wedding cake for them?

2. Gay person working at Kinkos who is offended by an ultra-religious person who wants to print signs that say "God Hates ####". Does the gay Kinkos employee have to print the sign?

i.e. Should we have laws that force people to put aside their personal beliefs and provide goods and services to any and all that want them? Or, should we allow business owners to discriminate and only serve those that they don't personally find offensive?

Again, I think we've seen that the latter fails. Can you imagine planning a road trip across America and having to avoid certain states because they won't fill up your tank or sell you lunch because you're traveling with a gay companion, or a black companion, or a Muslim???

Click to expand...

My problem with 1 (not my only problem...but one of them) is that the ultra religious baker likely does not turn down someone who has committed other sins and makes their cake but will typically turn down gays. I doubt the baker is doing background checks to make sure she is not making a cake for an adulterer. Does she make cakes for gluttons too? Well, probably...it is cake after all.

The gay kinkos employee could likely appeal to his/her boss and say he/she would rather not make such copies. How it works after that...I don't know.

Click to expand...

I think to be consistent, if we're going to demand that the baker put aside his/her beliefs and bake the cake for the gay couple, we have to also ask the gay Kinkos employee to print the sign. UNLESS its determined that the phrase "God Hates ####" is considered "hate speech". I guess we get into a freedom of speech discussion at that point, and whether or not and/or where the lines should be drawn. But, again, to be consistent, we're going to demand, via law, that everyone put aside their personal beliefs in most instances and serve everyone. I like the ruling that Saints posted out of NM. We all have to compromise a little. That's part of living in a free society.

Click to expand...

Ignoring the small straw man here (the notion that one needs to avoid entire states) I don't think federal or state legislation is necessary in either case. If a business owner doesn't want a certain demogrpahic's money, that's their decision...albeit probably a poor decision. On a similar note, if one doesn't want to help a customer because of their hate speech, that's between that individual and their boss. At that point it's a customer service and public perception issue. Let the market decide what's appropriate.

Click to expand...

The market has a pretty ####ty track record.

Click to expand...

Really? Someone brought up CFA a few posts back. The market seemed to work just fine in that case. Was it ####ty back in the day? Of course. Times are changing and technology is a powerful tool

Click to expand...

You're a fool if you don't think there are places where segregated businesses would be welcome and supported.

And your solution to the effected people in that area would be to shrug and declare that the market has spoken.

Click to expand...

Sure, in small pockets this will obviously be true that's why I didn't say that. The difference today is that we'd know about them and know about them quickly. I have faith that the collective people of this country would do the right thing once they found out about it.

Click to expand...

I'm not a faith guy. Give me science and evidence and history any day.

Click to expand...

The Commish said:

CowboysFromHell said:

pantagrapher said:

You're a fool if you don't think there are places where segregated businesses would be welcome and supported.

And your solution to the effected people in that area would be to shrug and declare that the market has spoken.

Click to expand...

This. Commish, sorry but I think you're solution would be disastrous. You really think the mom n pop businesses in the small towns of the Midwest give a flying crap about their social media profile? There'd be plenty of businesses doing just fine, thank you, in their small pockets of the country, serving their homogeneous local populations. And, outsiders would have to steer clear. Sounds like a great, united America to live in.

Click to expand...

Guess i just have more faith in society. There aren't many places to "hide" in this day and age.

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

My grandfather was unable to live in the house he wanted because the community, in west Los Angeles, was "restricted"- Jews were not allowed. No amount of free market ended this discrimination because there weren't enough Jews to make an economic difference and nobody else was willing to boycott. In the end the law had to be changed prohibiting such discrimination.

Click to expand...

What do you think would happen to a neighborhood like that in today's world if those rules didn't exist?

Click to expand...

Most developers wouldn't discriminate. But some probably would.

Click to expand...

roadkill1292 said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

timschochet said:

My grandfather was unable to live in the house he wanted because the community, in west Los Angeles, was "restricted"- Jews were not allowed. No amount of free market ended this discrimination because there weren't enough Jews to make an economic difference and nobody else was willing to boycott. In the end the law had to be changed prohibiting such discrimination.

Click to expand...

We still have segregated police unions, private clubs, Mardi Gras clubs, etc.

Do gays even want to make some random baker sell them a cake if they don't want to?

Click to expand...

They should be happy sticking with their own kind.

Click to expand...

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

My grandfather was unable to live in the house he wanted because the community, in west Los Angeles, was "restricted"- Jews were not allowed. No amount of free market ended this discrimination because there weren't enough Jews to make an economic difference and nobody else was willing to boycott. In the end the law had to be changed prohibiting such discrimination.

Click to expand...

What do you think would happen to a neighborhood like that in today's world if those rules didn't exist?

Click to expand...

Most developers wouldn't discriminate. But some probably would.

Click to expand...

And you think people would still simply turn their heads? You don't think they would provide plenty of fodder for our "media" to the point where they'd influence the development's decision making?

Click to expand...

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

My grandfather was unable to live in the house he wanted because the community, in west Los Angeles, was "restricted"- Jews were not allowed. No amount of free market ended this discrimination because there weren't enough Jews to make an economic difference and nobody else was willing to boycott. In the end the law had to be changed prohibiting such discrimination.

Click to expand...

What do you think would happen to a neighborhood like that in today's world if those rules didn't exist?

Click to expand...

Most developers wouldn't discriminate. But some probably would.

Click to expand...

And you think people would still simply turn their heads? You don't think they would provide plenty of fodder for our "media" to the point where they'd influence the development's decision making?

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

My grandfather was unable to live in the house he wanted because the community, in west Los Angeles, was "restricted"- Jews were not allowed. No amount of free market ended this discrimination because there weren't enough Jews to make an economic difference and nobody else was willing to boycott. In the end the law had to be changed prohibiting such discrimination.

Click to expand...

What do you think would happen to a neighborhood like that in today's world if those rules didn't exist?

Click to expand...

Most developers wouldn't discriminate. But some probably would.

Click to expand...

And you think people would still simply turn their heads? You don't think they would provide plenty of fodder for our "media" to the point where they'd influence the development's decision making?

Click to expand...

The public would respond by forcing the politicians to make a law which made it illegal to discriminate. Which you would oppose.

Click to expand...

The Commish said:

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

CowboysFromHell said:

sho nuff said:

CowboysFromHell said:

I do think it's an interesting question on how to deal with these two scenarios:

1. Ultra-religious baker who is offended by a gay couple getting married. Does he/she have to bake the wedding cake for them?

2. Gay person working at Kinkos who is offended by an ultra-religious person who wants to print signs that say "God Hates ####". Does the gay Kinkos employee have to print the sign?

i.e. Should we have laws that force people to put aside their personal beliefs and provide goods and services to any and all that want them? Or, should we allow business owners to discriminate and only serve those that they don't personally find offensive?

Again, I think we've seen that the latter fails. Can you imagine planning a road trip across America and having to avoid certain states because they won't fill up your tank or sell you lunch because you're traveling with a gay companion, or a black companion, or a Muslim???

Click to expand...

My problem with 1 (not my only problem...but one of them) is that the ultra religious baker likely does not turn down someone who has committed other sins and makes their cake but will typically turn down gays. I doubt the baker is doing background checks to make sure she is not making a cake for an adulterer. Does she make cakes for gluttons too? Well, probably...it is cake after all.

The gay kinkos employee could likely appeal to his/her boss and say he/she would rather not make such copies. How it works after that...I don't know.

Click to expand...

I think to be consistent, if we're going to demand that the baker put aside his/her beliefs and bake the cake for the gay couple, we have to also ask the gay Kinkos employee to print the sign. UNLESS its determined that the phrase "God Hates ####" is considered "hate speech". I guess we get into a freedom of speech discussion at that point, and whether or not and/or where the lines should be drawn. But, again, to be consistent, we're going to demand, via law, that everyone put aside their personal beliefs in most instances and serve everyone. I like the ruling that Saints posted out of NM. We all have to compromise a little. That's part of living in a free society.

Click to expand...

Ignoring the small straw man here (the notion that one needs to avoid entire states) I don't think federal or state legislation is necessary in either case. If a business owner doesn't want a certain demogrpahic's money, that's their decision...albeit probably a poor decision. On a similar note, if one doesn't want to help a customer because of their hate speech, that's between that individual and their boss. At that point it's a customer service and public perception issue. Let the market decide what's appropriate.

Click to expand...

The market has a pretty ####ty track record.

Click to expand...

Really? Someone brought up CFA a few posts back. The market seemed to work just fine in that case. Was it ####ty back in the day? Of course. Times are changing and technology is a powerful tool

Click to expand...

You're a fool if you don't think there are places where segregated businesses would be welcome and supported.

And your solution to the effected people in that area would be to shrug and declare that the market has spoken.

Click to expand...

Sure, in small pockets this will obviously be true that's why I didn't say that. The difference today is that we'd know about them and know about them quickly. I have faith that the collective people of this country would do the right thing once they found out about it.

Click to expand...

I'm not a faith guy. Give me science and evidence and history any day.

Click to expand...

"Evidence" seems an odd position to take here, given all the changes we are seeing in society. Evidence is pointing to people coming around to the attitude you deem preferable. The only way to hold your position of "only legislation telling people what they can/can't do will work" is to ignore the modern day evidence and hold on to the way it was in the past.

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

My grandfather was unable to live in the house he wanted because the community, in west Los Angeles, was "restricted"- Jews were not allowed. No amount of free market ended this discrimination because there weren't enough Jews to make an economic difference and nobody else was willing to boycott. In the end the law had to be changed prohibiting such discrimination.

Click to expand...

What do you think would happen to a neighborhood like that in today's world if those rules didn't exist?

Click to expand...

Most developers wouldn't discriminate. But some probably would.

Click to expand...

And you think people would still simply turn their heads? You don't think they would provide plenty of fodder for our "media" to the point where they'd influence the development's decision making?

Click to expand...

The public would respond by forcing the politicians to make a law which made it illegal to discriminate. Which you would oppose.

Click to expand...

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

My grandfather was unable to live in the house he wanted because the community, in west Los Angeles, was "restricted"- Jews were not allowed. No amount of free market ended this discrimination because there weren't enough Jews to make an economic difference and nobody else was willing to boycott. In the end the law had to be changed prohibiting such discrimination.

Click to expand...

What do you think would happen to a neighborhood like that in today's world if those rules didn't exist?

Click to expand...

Most developers wouldn't discriminate. But some probably would.

Click to expand...

And you think people would still simply turn their heads? You don't think they would provide plenty of fodder for our "media" to the point where they'd influence the development's decision making?

Click to expand...

The public would respond by forcing the politicians to make a law which made it illegal to discriminate. Which you would oppose.

Click to expand...

There's a difference between opposing and thinking it's not necessary. I don't have a problem with these types of laws. I just don't think they are necessary any more.

Click to expand...

pantagrapher said:

Evidence has shown it takes courts and laws. The public shaming helps, for sure, but it's not everything.

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

The Commish said:

timschochet said:

My grandfather was unable to live in the house he wanted because the community, in west Los Angeles, was "restricted"- Jews were not allowed. No amount of free market ended this discrimination because there weren't enough Jews to make an economic difference and nobody else was willing to boycott. In the end the law had to be changed prohibiting such discrimination.

Click to expand...

What do you think would happen to a neighborhood like that in today's world if those rules didn't exist?

Click to expand...

Most developers wouldn't discriminate. But some probably would.

Click to expand...

And you think people would still simply turn their heads? You don't think they would provide plenty of fodder for our "media" to the point where they'd influence the development's decision making?

Click to expand...

The public would respond by forcing the politicians to make a law which made it illegal to discriminate. Which you would oppose.

Click to expand...

There's a difference between opposing and thinking it's not necessary. I don't have a problem with these types of laws. I just don't think they are necessary any more.

Click to expand...

If you were governor of Indiana, and this law had reached your desk, would you have signed it or vetoed it?

Click to expand...

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

pantagrapher said:

The Commish said:

CowboysFromHell said:

sho nuff said:

CowboysFromHell said:

I do think it's an interesting question on how to deal with these two scenarios:

1. Ultra-religious baker who is offended by a gay couple getting married. Does he/she have to bake the wedding cake for them?

2. Gay person working at Kinkos who is offended by an ultra-religious person who wants to print signs that say "God Hates ####". Does the gay Kinkos employee have to print the sign?

i.e. Should we have laws that force people to put aside their personal beliefs and provide goods and services to any and all that want them? Or, should we allow business owners to discriminate and only serve those that they don't personally find offensive?

Again, I think we've seen that the latter fails. Can you imagine planning a road trip across America and having to avoid certain states because they won't fill up your tank or sell you lunch because you're traveling with a gay companion, or a black companion, or a Muslim???

Click to expand...

My problem with 1 (not my only problem...but one of them) is that the ultra religious baker likely does not turn down someone who has committed other sins and makes their cake but will typically turn down gays. I doubt the baker is doing background checks to make sure she is not making a cake for an adulterer. Does she make cakes for gluttons too? Well, probably...it is cake after all.

The gay kinkos employee could likely appeal to his/her boss and say he/she would rather not make such copies. How it works after that...I don't know.

Click to expand...

I think to be consistent, if we're going to demand that the baker put aside his/her beliefs and bake the cake for the gay couple, we have to also ask the gay Kinkos employee to print the sign. UNLESS its determined that the phrase "God Hates ####" is considered "hate speech". I guess we get into a freedom of speech discussion at that point, and whether or not and/or where the lines should be drawn. But, again, to be consistent, we're going to demand, via law, that everyone put aside their personal beliefs in most instances and serve everyone. I like the ruling that Saints posted out of NM. We all have to compromise a little. That's part of living in a free society.

Click to expand...

Ignoring the small straw man here (the notion that one needs to avoid entire states) I don't think federal or state legislation is necessary in either case. If a business owner doesn't want a certain demogrpahic's money, that's their decision...albeit probably a poor decision. On a similar note, if one doesn't want to help a customer because of their hate speech, that's between that individual and their boss. At that point it's a customer service and public perception issue. Let the market decide what's appropriate.

Click to expand...

The market has a pretty ####ty track record.

Click to expand...

Really? Someone brought up CFA a few posts back. The market seemed to work just fine in that case. Was it ####ty back in the day? Of course. Times are changing and technology is a powerful tool

Click to expand...

You're a fool if you don't think there are places where segregated businesses would be welcome and supported.

And your solution to the effected people in that area would be to shrug and declare that the market has spoken.

Click to expand...

sho nuff said:

CowboysFromHell said:

I do think it's an interesting question on how to deal with these two scenarios:

1. Ultra-religious baker who is offended by a gay couple getting married. Does he/she have to bake the wedding cake for them?

2. Gay person working at Kinkos who is offended by an ultra-religious person who wants to print signs that say "God Hates ####". Does the gay Kinkos employee have to print the sign?

i.e. Should we have laws that force people to put aside their personal beliefs and provide goods and services to any and all that want them? Or, should we allow business owners to discriminate and only serve those that they don't personally find offensive?

Again, I think we've seen that the latter fails. Can you imagine planning a road trip across America and having to avoid certain states because they won't fill up your tank or sell you lunch because you're traveling with a gay companion, or a black companion, or a Muslim???

Click to expand...

My problem with 1 (not my only problem...but one of them) is that the ultra religious baker likely does not turn down someone who has committed other sins and makes their cake but will typically turn down gays. I doubt the baker is doing background checks to make sure she is not making a cake for an adulterer. Does she make cakes for gluttons too? Well, probably...it is cake after all.

The gay kinkos employee could likely appeal to his/her boss and say he/she would rather not make such copies. How it works after that...I don't know.

Click to expand...

BigJohn said:

sho nuff said:

CowboysFromHell said:

I do think it's an interesting question on how to deal with these two scenarios:

1. Ultra-religious baker who is offended by a gay couple getting married. Does he/she have to bake the wedding cake for them?

2. Gay person working at Kinkos who is offended by an ultra-religious person who wants to print signs that say "God Hates ####". Does the gay Kinkos employee have to print the sign?

i.e. Should we have laws that force people to put aside their personal beliefs and provide goods and services to any and all that want them? Or, should we allow business owners to discriminate and only serve those that they don't personally find offensive?

Again, I think we've seen that the latter fails. Can you imagine planning a road trip across America and having to avoid certain states because they won't fill up your tank or sell you lunch because you're traveling with a gay companion, or a black companion, or a Muslim???

Click to expand...

My problem with 1 (not my only problem...but one of them) is that the ultra religious baker likely does not turn down someone who has committed other sins and makes their cake but will typically turn down gays. I doubt the baker is doing background checks to make sure she is not making a cake for an adulterer. Does she make cakes for gluttons too? Well, probably...it is cake after all.

The gay kinkos employee could likely appeal to his/her boss and say he/she would rather not make such copies. How it works after that...I don't know.

Click to expand...

Since the bakery is the popular example, I'll address it.

If a gay couple comes into a Christian bakery and order a birthday cake, in no way shape or form, should the baker be allowed to refuse service to them. But, if they order a cake with a pro-lgbt message, they should be able to refuse, based on the service, not the people he's serving.

The refusal should be based on the service requested, not the individual's beliefs.

Click to expand...

Gandalf the Grey said:

Yeah, I hate the "market will decide" argument. There's always a lag time in market responsiveness and that lag time =a lot of interim harm.

Click to expand...

beavers said:

BigJohn said:

sho nuff said:

CowboysFromHell said:

I do think it's an interesting question on how to deal with these two scenarios:

1. Ultra-religious baker who is offended by a gay couple getting married. Does he/she have to bake the wedding cake for them?

2. Gay person working at Kinkos who is offended by an ultra-religious person who wants to print signs that say "God Hates ####". Does the gay Kinkos employee have to print the sign?

i.e. Should we have laws that force people to put aside their personal beliefs and provide goods and services to any and all that want them? Or, should we allow business owners to discriminate and only serve those that they don't personally find offensive?

Again, I think we've seen that the latter fails. Can you imagine planning a road trip across America and having to avoid certain states because they won't fill up your tank or sell you lunch because you're traveling with a gay companion, or a black companion, or a Muslim???

Click to expand...

My problem with 1 (not my only problem...but one of them) is that the ultra religious baker likely does not turn down someone who has committed other sins and makes their cake but will typically turn down gays. I doubt the baker is doing background checks to make sure she is not making a cake for an adulterer. Does she make cakes for gluttons too? Well, probably...it is cake after all.

The gay kinkos employee could likely appeal to his/her boss and say he/she would rather not make such copies. How it works after that...I don't know.

Click to expand...

Since the bakery is the popular example, I'll address it.

If a gay couple comes into a Christian bakery and order a birthday cake, in no way shape or form, should the baker be allowed to refuse service to them. But, if they order a cake with a pro-lgbt message, they should be able to refuse, based on the service, not the people he's serving.

The refusal should be based on the service requested, not the individual's beliefs.

Click to expand...

This just happened in Bexley Ohio (about a 5 minute drive west of downtown Columbus).

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2998274/Videographer-refuses-film-sex-couple-s-wedding-spiritual-beliefs.html

Click to expand...

BigJohn said:

beavers said:

BigJohn said:

sho nuff said:

CowboysFromHell said:

I do think it's an interesting question on how to deal with these two scenarios:

1. Ultra-religious baker who is offended by a gay couple getting married. Does he/she have to bake the wedding cake for them?

2. Gay person working at Kinkos who is offended by an ultra-religious person who wants to print signs that say "God Hates ####". Does the gay Kinkos employee have to print the sign?

i.e. Should we have laws that force people to put aside their personal beliefs and provide goods and services to any and all that want them? Or, should we allow business owners to discriminate and only serve those that they don't personally find offensive?

Again, I think we've seen that the latter fails. Can you imagine planning a road trip across America and having to avoid certain states because they won't fill up your tank or sell you lunch because you're traveling with a gay companion, or a black companion, or a Muslim???

Click to expand...

My problem with 1 (not my only problem...but one of them) is that the ultra religious baker likely does not turn down someone who has committed other sins and makes their cake but will typically turn down gays. I doubt the baker is doing background checks to make sure she is not making a cake for an adulterer. Does she make cakes for gluttons too? Well, probably...it is cake after all.

The gay kinkos employee could likely appeal to his/her boss and say he/she would rather not make such copies. How it works after that...I don't know.

Click to expand...

Since the bakery is the popular example, I'll address it.

If a gay couple comes into a Christian bakery and order a birthday cake, in no way shape or form, should the baker be allowed to refuse service to them. But, if they order a cake with a pro-lgbt message, they should be able to refuse, based on the service, not the people he's serving.

The refusal should be based on the service requested, not the individual's beliefs.

Click to expand...

This just happened in Bexley Ohio (about a 5 minute drive west of downtown Columbus).

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2998274/Videographer-refuses-film-sex-couple-s-wedding-spiritual-beliefs.html

Click to expand...

And, while I don't agree with his choice, I support his right to decide on his own, what services he does or does not provide. Replace the cake in the bakery example with his pictures in this case and it's the same thing.

Click to expand...

Gandalf the Grey said:

There's always a lag time in market responsiveness and that lag time =a lot of interim harm.

Click to expand...

The Commish said:

pantagrapher said:

Evidence has shown it takes courts and laws. The public shaming helps, for sure, but it's not everything.

Click to expand...

What laws were enacted in the case of Chick-fil-a or any of the other situations like theirs? If public pressure can work on Chick-fil-a in this part of the country (Bible belt) it can work anywhere.

Click to expand...

njherdfan said:

What if you replace the lesbian couple with an interracial heterosexual couple. Putting aside the fact that it's illegal to discriminate based on race, should a business owner be allowed to discriminate based on race?

Click to expand...