Started By
Message
re: Is Mississippi the Hate State?
Posted on 4/6/16 at 12:54 pm to DynastyDawg
Posted on 4/6/16 at 12:54 pm to DynastyDawg
It is codifying a law that allows a religious based premise to discriminate against a group of people in matters of commerce.
If you are in the business of serving the public then serve the public equally.
If you are in the business of serving the public then serve the public equally.
0
Posted on 4/6/16 at 12:54 pm to DynastyDawg
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't restaurants have ways to get around some laws by labeling their business a "club." For instance, some restaurants in Nashville post a sign on their door and they can smoke (whereas smoking in other restaurants in Metro is illegal)
Posted on 4/6/16 at 12:55 pm to DynastyDawg
quote:
Go to places that accept their business. This is not like segregation. All straight people aren't telling homosexuals, "you can't eat here". They are quite in the minority of people actually. If they choose to do so, that is their right. It is our right to choose to do business with them or not.
Not all places were "whites only" either. Those blacks could have went elsewhere that accepted their business. In fact, I'd venture to say that exact sentence was said thousands of times in the 1960's.
quote:
Segregation is not what is happening with this law. I do not understand how people fail to realize that. As referenced above.
Segregation is one form of discrimination, and so is this law. But this law is a form of segregation , by definition.
quote:
the action or state of setting someone or something apart from other people or things or being set apart.
saying you will not serve gay people is setting gay people apart from your other heterosexual customers. Try again.
Posted on 4/6/16 at 12:57 pm to 3nOut
quote:
i wasn't around to hear the other side's argument. i just get what the history books tell me, right or wrong, accurate or not.
i would like to hear the pro-discrimination's side and see if was just rooted in flat-out racism, or there was any logical discussion to it.
you're reaching at this point to save face.
> You really think there is a logical discussion for not allowing blacks to drink from the same water fountain as whites? Really, 3nOut? Come on.
Posted on 4/6/16 at 12:58 pm to DynastyDawg
Check Fricking Mate. Thanks for playing.
You need to do a little research on what happened immediately after the Civil Rights Act was passed. Your arguments were made, heard, and struck down.
You need to do a little research on what happened immediately after the Civil Rights Act was passed. Your arguments were made, heard, and struck down.
This post was edited on 4/6/16 at 12:59 pm
Posted on 4/6/16 at 12:59 pm to DynastyDawg
quote:
Yes, it would be, because it should be their right as a business owner. And I wouldn't be dining in that restaurant as a white person, along with a large number of other white people.
plenty of white people still dined in that establishment in the 1960's, and loved the fact that blacks could not.
And before you say "well this is 2016", you know what started shifting people's inherent feelings towards segregation? the fricking Civil Rights Movement.
Good lord man. You're dense.
This post was edited on 4/6/16 at 1:01 pm
Posted on 4/6/16 at 12:59 pm to cas4t
quote:
Not all places were "whites only" either. Those blacks could have went elsewhere that accepted their business. In fact, I'd venture to say that exact sentence was said thousands of times in the 1960's.
Answer this question honestly and directly.
What do you think there were, or will be more of, "whites only", or "straights only"?
Also, do you think this will even be close by comparison?
Posted on 4/6/16 at 1:00 pm to cas4t
quote:
You really think there is a logical discussion for not allowing blacks to drink from the same water fountain as whites? Really, 3nOut? Come on.
of course not! a-hole.
i'm just asking if there's anybody who wasn't racist arguing for discrimination
This post was edited on 4/6/16 at 1:03 pm
Posted on 4/6/16 at 1:01 pm to DynastyDawg
Of course whites only, but is your new argument that this is such a small minority that it isn't worth fretting over?
Posted on 4/6/16 at 1:02 pm to wmr
It's not enough that they go down the street and get someone else to bake a cake. The real rub is that the Christian baker does not have to validate their hedonistic lifestyle. That is what bothers them the most. It's not enough that it is tolerated. It has to be condoned (but preferably celebrated enthusiastically, bigots).
Posted on 4/6/16 at 1:02 pm to 3nOut
well stop reaching! You agree with me deep down. I get that you have to stick to your core, conservative, less government values. But at the end of the day there are some things that the government need to try and manage, for the sake of the people. This is one of them.
Posted on 4/6/16 at 1:03 pm to TheRodFather
quote:
The real rub is that the Christian baker does not have to validate their hedonistic lifestyle. That is what bothers them the most
Posted on 4/6/16 at 1:03 pm to cas4t
quote:
Check Fricking Mate. Thanks for playing.
quote:
Good lord man. You're dense.
14&Counting - cas4t - Resorting to childish name-calling and insults.
3nOut - DynastyDawg - Trying to have a discussion. (Thanks 3nOut)
Why are these types of occurrences so common among this type of disagreement?
This post was edited on 4/6/16 at 1:05 pm
Posted on 4/6/16 at 1:04 pm to DynastyDawg
I called you dense because you're being dense.
Me insulting you doesn't validate any of the dense points you've attempted to make.
I also answered your question and asked my own above, feel free to answer.
eta no one called you any names. I said you were being dense and 14 said check mate. Stop being thin skinned.
Me insulting you doesn't validate any of the dense points you've attempted to make.
I also answered your question and asked my own above, feel free to answer.
eta no one called you any names. I said you were being dense and 14 said check mate. Stop being thin skinned.
This post was edited on 4/6/16 at 1:07 pm
Posted on 4/6/16 at 1:04 pm to cas4t
quote:
But at the end of the day there are some things that the government need to try and manage, for the sake of the people.
yes. better roads in Louisiana.
Posted on 4/6/16 at 1:05 pm to 3nOut
That'd be a nice start
Posted on 4/6/16 at 1:06 pm to TheRodFather
Why should they be forced to go to another establishment? Why is forcing someone to go to another establishment acceptable? What if there isn't another establishment?
Posted on 4/6/16 at 1:07 pm to TheRodFather
quote:
It's not enough that it is tolerated. It has to be condoned
This is what I feel like is wrong with all these issues. You cannot disagree with something and simply tolerate it. You have to participate and celebrate it.
Posted on 4/6/16 at 1:07 pm to DynastyDawg
quote:
What do you think there were, or will be more of, "whites only", or "straights only"?
Also, do you think this will even be close by comparison?
I fail to see how this matters.
Posted on 4/6/16 at 1:08 pm to DynastyDawg
quote:
You have to participate and celebrate it.
Yeah... that's not true.
Page 4 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News