re: Catholic couple fined $13,000 for refusing to host same-sex ‘wedding’

quote:

---

Lemme guess, you would also support government forcing churches to perform gay marriage ceremonies?

---

If they offer the service to the public for a fee, damn right. But they don't, so no.

quote:

---

If they offer the service to the public for a fee, damn right. But they don't, so no.

---

Many churches charge people to use their church for weddings, so you're now in favor of forcing those churches to marry the gays, I guess.

quote:

---

If they offer the service to the public for a fee, damn right. But they don't, so no.

---

I know you're fiercely anti religion, but COME ON SON, do you even, Constitution brah?

quote:

---

I've also stated that the law is stupid because the property owners should have the right to refuse service if said service conflicts with their personal and constitutionally protected religious beliefs.

---

And I asked you if their religious beliefs were circa early 1900s Christianity, and they didn't believe in a black man marrying a white woman was God's will, would the law still be stupid? You've refused to answer that question.

quote:

---

You're the one who kept bringing up civil rights violations against blacks that occurred 50 years ago.

---

Because you refused to answer the question above.

quote:

---

Lemme guess, you would also support government forcing churches to perform gay marriage ceremonies?

---

No. That doesn't make sense. Why would I force a religious institution to do anything? Because you believe that this farm owner's freedom of religion is being violated? I will then refer you to a different version of the above question you've refused to answer. If they didn't believe in interracial marriage due to religious reasons, and a black and white couple wanted to rent their property, would it be violating their freedom of religion?

We are talking about a commercial enterprise here. Do you really not see the difference? The government doesn't have the right to break in to your house and take 10% of what is out of your wallet. If you try and engage in commerce on your private property, they have the right to make sure your shite it up to code, that you aren't violating any health regulations, and that you pay income taxes. Private property rights are not the issue here, regardless of how many times you claim they are. This is commerce.

Why do right-wingers make generalizations? There, back at you.

quote:

---

Gays are a real, not fake, protected class in New York. Does that knowledge change your answer?

---

There used to be legal standards to determine what constituted a protected class. Now it is whatever is popular to be a protected class. If I get legislation passed that declares trout a protected class they would legally be a protected class. They wouldn't deserve being a protected class. But they would be a protected class cuz the law says so.

quote:

---

If it's a fake protected class, then they're different.

If the state of Missouri makes gingers a protected class, does that make them "equal" to blacks in a discriminated class?

---

So that's the root of your belief. You should have just said you hate gays and don't believe they can be discriminated against.

quote:

---

That doesn't make sense. Why would I force a religious institution to do anything?

---

Kentucker has already painted himself into this corner. Kudos on sidestepping your own logic.

quote:

---

This is the part I don't get. So what? If they had denied a ceremony to an exceptionally fat and/or ugly couple because it would be bad for business, would anybody care? Or forget any reasons given at all - why can't a business owner just say, "No, we don't want your business"? It's not like the lesbian couple couldn't be married somewhere else.

---

The fact that the gay couple recorded the conversation that they were told they couldn't get married by the owners, and the "staff" now has to take sensitivity training, leads me to believe the couple had an idea it was coming which means they thought they were going to get it no problems, then the owners that weren't dealing with the patrons found out they were gay and told the employees to end it.

Yes though. They should have lied and found a different reason to cancel it.

quote:

---

quote: If it's a fake protected class, then they're different. If the state of Missouri makes gingers a protected class, does that make them "equal" to blacks in a discriminated class? So that's the root of your belief. You should have just said you hate gays and don't believe they can be discriminated against.

---

You're bad at arguing and good at selective quoting. By what basis were blacks declared to be a protected class? Any idea?

quote:

---

First, the Civil Rights Act acknowledges that protected classes have in common a history of discrimination by the majority white population. It also states that protected classes have certain "inmutable" characteristics. That is, they have characteristics -- such as color, ethnicity or gender -- that they cannot change.

---

And that's why the full court propaganda press has been on to say that homosexuality is genetic. So that it is a legitimate protected class. It's not, of course.