phook.net

Yes!! Jag runkar!
It is currently Sun Dec 10, 2017 10:00 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 155 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2000 10:52 pm
Posts: 57552
Location: Capitalism is not an excuse for greed.
Quote:
"The lawyer for the solicitor general's office for the administration said today in the Supreme Court if it would be legal, possible for a baker to put a sign in his window saying we don't bake cakes for gay weddings," The New York Times's Michael Shear asked. "Does the president agree that that would be ok?"

"The president certainly supports religious liberty and that's something he talked about during the campaign and has upheld since taking office," Sanders replied.

When pressed on whether that included support for signs that deny service to gay people, Sanders responded: "I believe that would include that."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 1:36 pm
Posts: 114888
Location: prarie princess
pos potus and administration


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:09 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2002 12:03 am
Posts: 38891
Location: ^^^^Bernese Sanders^^^^
i say be homophobic if you want (it makes you a piece of shit, but thats your problem), but dont discriminate.

this signals trump is not only okay with homophobia, but he's okay with using that as a basis for legalized discrimination.

_________________
Wilson wrote:
I already told you I'm an idiot, what else are you looking for here?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2001 1:24 am
Posts: 95258
Location: Set your phasers to meow
The stick scotus ruling is hinging on Kennedy again and he has shown that he is troubled by both sides of his potential ruling.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:14 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2002 1:42 pm
Posts: 81470
Location: Exactly where I'm supposed to be.
Kennedy said Colorado did a poor job presenting its case. News here says they expect SCOTUS to rule in favor of the baker.

They’ve made it into a artistic expression. He says his cakes are art, and that he cannot express himself in away that goes against his beliefs.

_________________
dontbedenied wrote:
I'm a faggot douchebag dirtball alcoholic in need of therapy to deal w my self esteem issues


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 2:04 pm
Posts: 21209
Location: St. Paul, MN
Imagine giving a shit about gay people getting married enough to go through all this bullshit over cakes

I just can't wrap my head around it. Some truly dumb and bigoted people out there


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2001 10:52 am
Posts: 10470
Location: Memphis
Making a bigot-owned establishment advertise its bigotry will keep me from making the mistake of spending my money there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2000 10:52 pm
Posts: 57552
Location: Capitalism is not an excuse for greed.
What argument is there?

Discrimination is wrong no matter what the reason. How is this even a question?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:22 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2002 12:03 am
Posts: 38891
Location: ^^^^Bernese Sanders^^^^
mr_bearcobb wrote:
The stick scotus ruling is hinging on Kennedy again and he has shown that he is troubled by both sides of his potential ruling.


basically

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... 038ed6c99a

There will be no winners in the Supreme Court’s wedding cake case

Greg Weiner is an associate professor of political science at Assumption College. He is author of “Madison’s Metronome: The Constitution, Majority Rule, and the Tempo of American Politics.”

The public fascination with the Supreme Court, shrouded in mystery and robed with power, lies in its operatic authority not just to dispense justice but also to do so with dramatic flair. Someone wins, and someone loses. That is precisely what makes the court too blunt an instrument for resolving many conflicts of rights.

The court will hear arguments Tuesday for a case that illustrates this perfectly. It involves a baker who refused on religious grounds to produce a cake for a gay couple’s wedding reception. The dispute has been described as a landmark test of LGBT rights. It is also being heralded as a moment to protect religious liberty.

But in reality, this case is testing the limits of the courts’ ability to resolve social disputes. No matter which party prevails, there is no winning scenario.

Left to the political process — or even better, to informal mechanisms of society — the conflict almost certainly could be resolved without forcing a choice between anti-discrimination laws and religious freedom. Surely no one believes same-sex couples actually want the services of a baker they consider a bigot. The object of the case is not to secure Masterpiece Cakeshop’s services. It is to dragoon its owner, Jack C. Phillips, into compliance with their views.

The problem is that Phillips can’t be forced to agree with those views. He can only be made to deliver a cake, but that outcome would almost surely set the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights movement back by stoking resentment from its opponents. That is exactly what happened in the late 1990s and early 2000s, when court rulings sparked a wave of state constitutional amendments defining marriage heterosexually.

Court cases — or in the Colorado bakery instance, civil rights complaints resolved by administrative judges — tend to do that. While the political process is rooted in persuasion and compromise, rights claims signal to their targets that complainants do not believe they should have to engage in either.

Diplomat and legal scholar Mary Ann Glendon calls this “rights talk,” or the substitution of rights claims for reason-giving. Whereas reason-giving — dialogue and persuasion, essentially — brings people together, rights talk splits them further apart. Where compromise bridges conflicts, rights talk accentuates them.

In this case, rights talk is forcing a conflict between two fundamental values. Of course, sometimes values collide and society must choose. But the prudent first course should be to avert collision.

The most obvious option is for a couple to obtain their wedding cake from a baker who is happy to supply it and from whom they are pleased to purchase it. Masterpiece Cakeshop is outside Denver. The supply of bakers there is ample. Common sense — or common courtesy — provides supple tools to resolve the dispute.

Those who believe in tougher measures against discrimination also have tools: There is a growing market for same-sex weddings that Masterpiece Cakeshop is losing — a more severe punishment than courts are capable of meting out.

In either case, the challenge for rights advocates is implementing long-term changes. The solution is erecting a deep foundation of support. James Madison recognized as much. He derided bills of rights as “parchment barriers” easily overrun by majorities who did not genuinely support them. When he came around to endorsing a Bill of Rights, Madison said that one of its foremost purposes would be creating a basis for educating and appealing to the public.

This political model of rights has given way to a judicial ethic that explicitly aims to spare citizens the slower yet surer work of persuading one another. It has exempted elected officials from the responsibility of balancing competing values.

One might ask what distinguishes this case from laws concerning racial discrimination. In other words, why not also keep those from the courts?

One answer is that cases such as Brown v. Board of Education did not contribute nearly as much to desegregation as political processes did. The more important answer is that the judiciary is a clumsy instrument for such distinctions. There is a substantial difference between sincere religious objections to same-sex marriage and bogus objections to laws against racial discrimination. Most people can make that distinction intuitively.

In Masterpiece Cakeshop , LGBT advocates can hope for a pyrrhic victory at best. Conscientious objectors to same-sex weddings may be pressed into service, but only at the long-range cost of intensifying their opposition. A vindication of religious liberty, meanwhile, would tarnish that value, however unfairly, with the taint of discrimination.

These are unfortunate choices, all the more so because they are unnecessary. Politics would avert them. Informal mechanisms of society — the couple choosing another baker, the baker forgoing business — would defuse them. Diverting the case to court is the only scenario in which, by forcing a winner, everyone loses.

_________________
Wilson wrote:
I already told you I'm an idiot, what else are you looking for here?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:23 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 6:48 pm
Posts: 55699
Location: I'm your huckleberry
BigJibboo wrote:
They’ve made it into a artistic expression. He says his cakes are art, and that he cannot express himself in away that goes against his beliefs.



it's really a far more interesting case than the media (and most people make it out to be)


https://news.vice.com/story/the-most-watched-scotus-case-this-term-is-about-cake


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:26 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 6:06 pm
Posts: 49520
Location: Hail state!!!!!
Wouldn't that be a good thing? If every racist, homophobe wore a sign it would be great.

All this would do is let people know the business is run by hateful people and you wouldn't accidentally spend your money there

_________________

“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.”

― Dalai Lama XIV


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2001 12:05 pm
Posts: 13297
Location: Madison Park, the 11, sometimes the 12. Big tower
BonnieLee wrote:
Wouldn't that be a good thing? If every racist, homophobe wore a sign it would be great.

All this would do is let people know the business is run by hateful people and you wouldn't accidentally spend your money there



this.

almost like the opposite of hanging the "flag of inclusion". like a little sticker with a dunce cap for the symbol. Put it right below or above the yelp sticker......
sort of like this:

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:59 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2002 12:03 am
Posts: 38891
Location: ^^^^Bernese Sanders^^^^
BonnieLee wrote:
Wouldn't that be a good thing? If every racist, homophobe wore a sign it would be great.

All this would do is let people know the business is run by hateful people and you wouldn't accidentally spend your money there

well, it'd do well in hurting their business, but it'd also foster a culture of acceptance for bigotry.

_________________
Wilson wrote:
I already told you I'm an idiot, what else are you looking for here?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 7:00 am
Posts: 22470
Location: Music touches feelings that words cannot.
Image

You guys really think that hanging signs are a good way of dealing with this?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:28 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2002 1:42 pm
Posts: 81470
Location: Exactly where I'm supposed to be.
What if I think inter racial marriage is wrong?

Can I not make a cake for for them?

_________________
dontbedenied wrote:
I'm a faggot douchebag dirtball alcoholic in need of therapy to deal w my self esteem issues


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 1:36 pm
Posts: 114888
Location: prarie princess
yep, if it interferes with their art


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:29 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 6:06 pm
Posts: 49520
Location: Hail state!!!!!
halYEM wrote:
BonnieLee wrote:
Wouldn't that be a good thing? If every racist, homophobe wore a sign it would be great.

All this would do is let people know the business is run by hateful people and you wouldn't accidentally spend your money there

well, it'd do well in hurting their business, but it'd also foster a culture of acceptance for bigotry.


Until those businesses close down because of poor sales.

Then it would foster a culture that bigotry is NOT accepted and is a bad business model.

Bigots hiding out in the open is a good thing.

_________________

“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.”

― Dalai Lama XIV


Last edited by BonnieLee on Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:31 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2002 1:42 pm
Posts: 81470
Location: Exactly where I'm supposed to be.
Depends where those businesses are. They could thrive in many markets.

_________________
dontbedenied wrote:
I'm a faggot douchebag dirtball alcoholic in need of therapy to deal w my self esteem issues


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:33 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2002 12:03 am
Posts: 38891
Location: ^^^^Bernese Sanders^^^^
i dont believe we should let the free market be what combats bigotry, i think there's a moral obligation to stand up to discrimination rather than to allow it and ignore it.

_________________
Wilson wrote:
I already told you I'm an idiot, what else are you looking for here?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:37 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2002 1:42 pm
Posts: 81470
Location: Exactly where I'm supposed to be.
halYEM wrote:
i dont believe we should let the free market be what combats bigotry, i think there's a moral obligation to stand up to discrimination rather than to allow it and ignore it.



Of course.

What happens if they rule for the baker? What about photographers? What about Florists?

_________________
dontbedenied wrote:
I'm a faggot douchebag dirtball alcoholic in need of therapy to deal w my self esteem issues


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 1:36 pm
Posts: 114888
Location: prarie princess
sanctioned discrimination


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:41 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 6:06 pm
Posts: 49520
Location: Hail state!!!!!
halYEM wrote:
i dont believe we should let the free market be what combats bigotry, i think there's a moral obligation to stand up to discrimination rather than to allow it and ignore it.


Well your opponent think they have a MORAL obligation to stand against homosexuality.

They believe the being that created the world wants them too.

We have to be careful using morals as reasons to legislate.

_________________

“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.”

― Dalai Lama XIV


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:45 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 6:06 pm
Posts: 49520
Location: Hail state!!!!!
Because that is what is happening. Republicans are doing their moral obligations.

It is still a free market. It's just a market of morals

You think you we shouldn't morally. They think we should morally. The moral free market is turning the wrong way. Let's see what a true financial free market does

_________________

“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.”

― Dalai Lama XIV


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:47 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2002 12:03 am
Posts: 38891
Location: ^^^^Bernese Sanders^^^^
okay, i agree. not the best word use. maybe ethical instead of moral

i value human rights above bigotry masquerading as religious expression, masquerading as "art"

it shouldnt be so complicated, but i get how it is. read the article i posted, no one walks away from this a winner.

_________________
Wilson wrote:
I already told you I'm an idiot, what else are you looking for here?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 10:46 am
Posts: 11128
there's *some* element of "artistic expression" involved in almost any good or service that an owner creates or provides for him/herself, so long as they're not just a pass-through seller

food, jewelry, floral arrangements, clothes-making/fashion, hairstyling, graphic design, etc., etc.

it's a red herring to call this about his "speech" that he puts into decorating his cakes. He had no discussion with the couple about what they wanted him to say or draw on the cake itself, he flat-out refused to create one of any kind, with any decoration, if it would be used a gay wedding. if they'd asked him to create a plain blank cake with flowers and no writing, he would have refused because of where the cake would be presented and eaten -- because of his *religious beliefs" about gay marriage, not because of the "artistry" of the cake or what he did or didn't express on it

they're only trying to make this about alleged "speech" because they know the federal courts have rejected claims that people should be allowed to discriminate against customers because of their religious beliefs--like the BBQ restaurant owner who claimed it was against his religion to serve black customers and have them sit with his white customers (Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises

Quote:
“Undoubtedly defendant Bessinger has a constitutional right to espouse the religious beliefs of his own choosing, however, he does not have the absolute right to exercise and practice such beliefs in utter disregard of the clear constitutional rights of other citizens,” U.S. District Judge Charles Earl Simons Jr. wrote in 1966.

By the time the Supreme Court heard the case in 1968, the issue was the award of fees to the lawyers representing the black South Carolinians who sued Bessinger’s restaurants. But in a footnote to its unsigned 8-0 opinion, the court called the religious freedom argument and Bessinger’s other defenses “patently frivolous.”


the cake shop owner can speak out on religious issues, in person, on the internet and in print. he has freedom to attend and support whatever church he wants, and fund causes/churches/political candidates that are in line with his views. he can express himself in an infinite number of ways that are protected by the constitution. he can proselytize on the street-corner, write books and pamphlets, etc., etc.

HOWEVER, once you decide open a business to sell to all members of the public, and hold yourself out as a place of public accommodation, you can't pick or choose who they are based on your religious beliefs. what if based on his religious beliefs he didn't want to "express himself" by making a cake for an interracial wedding or a jewish bar mitzvah or a transgendered person's birthday or a Mexican-American's citizenship celebration or for a Muslim family celebrating Ramadan? you run a public business, you serve everyone, period.

fuck all of that, falsely cloaking hate, intolerance and exclusion as "religious freedom" is not what this country is about


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:55 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 6:06 pm
Posts: 49520
Location: Hail state!!!!!
halYEM wrote:
okay, i agree. not the best word use. maybe ethical instead of moral

i value human rights above bigotry masquerading as religious expression, masquerading as "art"

it shouldnt be so complicated, but i get how it is. read the article i posted, no one walks away from this a winner.


I will read it after work. And yes it shouldn't be complicated, but unfortunately people have different ethics and morals. Regardless of if we think it's masquerading as religion or not....the fact is A LOT of Christians truly believe it's a big sin

They think ethically it is wrong to allow it. If society allows homosexuality to be accepted, then we are damning people's soul to hell.

That's absurd to us, but they actually believe it. They are "supposed to save souls and get people to heaven". In their eyes accepting homosexuality is the opposite. We are damning souls to hell.

Same with abortion.

People REALLY BELIEVE it's a sin. Good luck saying they are morally or ethically wrong. Because they believe you are ethically wrong....and they have God on their side

_________________

“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.”

― Dalai Lama XIV


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 10:46 am
Posts: 11128
what if it was a muslim baker who didn't want to make a cake for a Christian wedding because he thought they were infidels?

fucking joint would have been burned to the ground by a mob


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 9:33 am
Posts: 747
Location: Floor 7 & 1/2
still waiting for a recording of God speaking to someone

_________________
MALKOVICH!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2000 5:37 pm
Posts: 37471
Location: The south LOL!
Religion is actually at the very root in one form or another of most of the issues that keep humans from living in less numbers on a more peaceful cleaner planet with more resources to share.

It’s so sad.

_________________
When a mans belly is full it matters not whether he is rich or poor.

- Euripides


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:00 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2002 1:42 pm
Posts: 81470
Location: Exactly where I'm supposed to be.
MiD wrote:
what if it was a muslim baker who didn't want to make a cake for a Christian wedding because he thought they were infidels?

fucking joint would have been burned to the ground by a mob



:frantic:

Great point.

_________________
dontbedenied wrote:
I'm a faggot douchebag dirtball alcoholic in need of therapy to deal w my self esteem issues


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:03 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 6:48 pm
Posts: 55699
Location: I'm your huckleberry
what if it's a black baker asked to make a KKK cake? Should he be allowed to refuse service?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 10:46 am
Posts: 11128
Nondo wrote:
what if it's a black baker asked to make a KKK cake? Should he be allowed to refuse service?


the KKK is abhorrent

unfortunately, no, he's gotta make the cake

same result

cool part is their own racism would prevent this from being a problem


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:27 am
Posts: 26747
let's get serious, God knows what he's doing. He wrote this book here, and the book says: He made us all to be just like Him," so if we're dumb, then God is dumb and maybe even a little ugly on the side.

_________________
It is written, "he who makes the best egg salad shall rule over heaven and earth." Don't ask me why egg salad; I have enough aggravation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 10:46 am
Posts: 11128
muslim car dealer who doesn't want to sell a car to a woman, because he believes it's a sin for her to drive

even if that's a sincerely-held religious belief, Americans would tell him to fuck off

but a Christian who doesn't want to make a cake for a gay couple?

hell yeah! first amendment! 'Murica!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 1:36 pm
Posts: 114888
Location: prarie princess
i would love for a different religion to turn the tables on christianity


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:13 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2002 12:03 am
Posts: 38891
Location: ^^^^Bernese Sanders^^^^
BonnieLee wrote:
halYEM wrote:
okay, i agree. not the best word use. maybe ethical instead of moral

i value human rights above bigotry masquerading as religious expression, masquerading as "art"

it shouldnt be so complicated, but i get how it is. read the article i posted, no one walks away from this a winner.


I will read it after work. And yes it shouldn't be complicated, but unfortunately people have different ethics and morals. Regardless of if we think it's masquerading as religion or not....the fact is A LOT of Christians truly believe it's a big sin

They think ethically it is wrong to allow it. If society allows homosexuality to be accepted, then we are damning people's soul to hell.

That's absurd to us, but they actually believe it. They are "supposed to save souls and get people to heaven". In their eyes accepting homosexuality is the opposite. We are damning souls to hell.

Same with abortion.

People REALLY BELIEVE it's a sin. Good luck saying they are morally or ethically wrong. Because they believe you are ethically wrong....and they have God on their side

the point of the separation of church and state is that we dont govern based on what one religion believes is a sin. the whole point of religous freedom is that we allow people to practice as they wish but not persecuted as a result of anothers belief.

it doesnt matter what is absurd or what others believe. the laws seem to dictate that a) LGBT persons have rights the same as the rest of us and b) one religious belief cannot be foisted onto the public at large.

obviously there is pretty intricate lawyering to be had to fight for the competing ideas, and eloquent and legally plausible arguments can be created on both sides. but only one side panders to discriminatory practice.

_________________
Wilson wrote:
I already told you I'm an idiot, what else are you looking for here?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2000 5:37 pm
Posts: 37471
Location: The south LOL!
I would love for humans to evolve past religion in general.

It’s essentially just been a tool to control money and oppress women, different cultures, etc.

It’s one more thing that removes individuals from the species into subsets which will be exploited by the people with money and power to keep the money and power.

The worlds oldest shell game.

Fuck religion.

_________________
When a mans belly is full it matters not whether he is rich or poor.

- Euripides


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:23 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2002 12:03 am
Posts: 38891
Location: ^^^^Bernese Sanders^^^^
Nondo wrote:
what if it's a black baker asked to make a KKK cake? Should he be allowed to refuse service?

i feel like nearly every business has a "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" sign somewhere.
the thing is, you cant refuse based on nationally protected classes, of which a KKK member is not.

_________________
Wilson wrote:
I already told you I'm an idiot, what else are you looking for here?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 7:00 am
Posts: 22470
Location: Music touches feelings that words cannot.
BigJibboo wrote:
halYEM wrote:
i dont believe we should let the free market be what combats bigotry, i think there's a moral obligation to stand up to discrimination rather than to allow it and ignore it.



Of course.

What happens if they rule for the baker? What about photographers? What about Florists?


Dont work in industries that require you to service customers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:35 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 6:06 pm
Posts: 49520
Location: Hail state!!!!!
Does social media foster an acceptance of bigotry? We allow people to express hate and it clearly impacted the presidential election.

Should Facebook and Twitter not allow racist and homophobic ideas to be posted?

_________________

“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.”

― Dalai Lama XIV


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:44 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2002 12:03 am
Posts: 38891
Location: ^^^^Bernese Sanders^^^^
BonnieLee wrote:
Does social media foster an acceptance of bigotry? We allow people to express hate and it clearly impacted the presidential election.

Should Facebook and Twitter not allow racist and homophobic ideas to be posted?

complete false equivalence. posting personally on facebook and twitter isn't servicing the public as a business. but if you recall after charlottesville, plenty of people who posted their presence at the rally rightfully lost their jobs because businesses dont want to be associated with that shit.
and i stand up against racism and homophobia there just like i would with this business. fortunately, i hardly ever see any of it on social media because im not friends with assholes.

additionally, facebook's official policy is that it doesnt endorse hate speech and encourages reporting it.

_________________
Wilson wrote:
I already told you I'm an idiot, what else are you looking for here?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:46 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2002 12:03 am
Posts: 38891
Location: ^^^^Bernese Sanders^^^^
are you just playing devils advocate here, or do you think discrimination should be allowed and bigotry should be tolerated?

_________________
Wilson wrote:
I already told you I'm an idiot, what else are you looking for here?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2001 1:24 am
Posts: 95258
Location: Set your phasers to meow
Um why aren't more people talking about how Colorado made a poor case? If Kennedy goes the "wrong" way maybe someone should argue it better the next time around.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 10:46 am
Posts: 11128
mr_bearcobb wrote:
Um why aren't more people talking about how Colorado made a poor case? If Kennedy goes the "wrong" way maybe someone should argue it better the next time around.


with the amount of research the justices and their clerks will do on their own

and the number of amicus briefs that have likely been filed

I'd expect the court to still reach the right result, even if one attorney flubbed the oral argument


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2001 12:05 pm
Posts: 13297
Location: Madison Park, the 11, sometimes the 12. Big tower
mr_bearcobb wrote:
Um why aren't more people talking about how Colorado made a poor case? If Kennedy goes the "wrong" way maybe someone should argue it better the next time around.


because the 'Brah is an inherently racist/bigoted/redneck dominated state outside of the I25/I70 corridor ?

bet no baker in Craig would make a cake for a gay couple either. or Montrose.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:07 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 6:06 pm
Posts: 49520
Location: Hail state!!!!!
halYEM wrote:
are you just playing devils advocate here, or do you think discrimination should be allowed and bigotry should be tolerated?


No. I am applying the same shaming model we use in social media to businesses.

Just like sone racist go viral for posting hate speech on social media and face a backlash, I think posting a hateful sign on a business might work to.

I am if the opinion we are better off knowing who the racist are. We don't want them to hide

_________________

“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.”

― Dalai Lama XIV


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2001 1:24 am
Posts: 95258
Location: Set your phasers to meow
MiD wrote:
mr_bearcobb wrote:
Um why aren't more people talking about how Colorado made a poor case? If Kennedy goes the "wrong" way maybe someone should argue it better the next time around.


with the amount of research the justices and their clerks will do on their own

and the number of amicus briefs that have likely been filed

I'd expect the court to still reach the right result, even if one attorney flubbed the oral argument



That is what happens when you have a single person responsible for the interpretation of the laws in this country.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:11 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 6:06 pm
Posts: 49520
Location: Hail state!!!!!
If Paula Deen had put up a "no blacks" sign in her restaurant 20 years ago, maybe she wouldn't have become rich and famous

Find out she is a racist 20 years ago, not after she gets rich and has the truth come out.

_________________

“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.”

― Dalai Lama XIV


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2001 10:01 am
Posts: 18460
Location: Kiner's Corner
Jbslist wrote:
I would love for humans to evolve past religion in general.

It’s essentially just been a tool to control money and oppress women, different cultures, etc.

It’s one more thing that removes individuals from the species into subsets which will be exploited by the people with money and power to keep the money and power.

The worlds oldest shell game.

Fuck religion.


Explain how you're not a bigot?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 1:36 pm
Posts: 114888
Location: prarie princess
iluvtela wrote:
Jbslist wrote:
I would love for humans to evolve past religion in general.

It’s essentially just been a tool to control money and oppress women, different cultures, etc.

It’s one more thing that removes individuals from the species into subsets which will be exploited by the people with money and power to keep the money and power.

The worlds oldest shell game.

Fuck religion.


Explain how you're not a bigot?


explain how religion has a place in our govt


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 155 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BigJibboo, bluegrasshole, BonnieLee, brokenoldman, buttbot, cuphish, dondeez, fleetmac, guyute_1, halYEM, joe_, md232, metamunch, out_to_play, phellow, pishsucks, robbe, thsea and 23 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Americanized by Maël Soucaze.