meazza Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 What if it were a Muslim company that didn't want to cater a wedding because they were serving alcohol? Or they requesting a rum cake and they didn't want to handle the alcohol? Or a Muslim caterer that didn't want to do it because they wanted pork on the menu? They could compromise by putting death to America on the cake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 What if it were a Muslim company that didn't want to cater a wedding because they were serving alcohol? Or they requesting a rum cake and they didn't want to handle the alcohol? Or a Muslim caterer that didn't want to do it because they wanted pork on the menu? Winner. They're discriminating against people who drink alcohol! - Dorkington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 What exactly are these laws supposed to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Winner. They're discriminating against people who drink alcohol! - Dorkington This is not a law about gays. They're just the cause du jour. What exactly are these laws supposed to do? Are you being this dense on purpose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 This is not a law about gays. They're just the cause du jour. Are you being this dense on purpose? Yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 (edited) What exactly are these laws supposed to do? Gee.... you already insisted several times in this thread that you have read the law, and in the economic/jobs thread you made a poor attempt at a point by misrepresenting what the religious liberty law is all about. So, it would be safe to say, that your question was not asked honestly. . Edited April 3, 2015 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 What if it were a Muslim company that didn't want to cater a wedding because they were serving alcohol? Or they requesting a rum cake and they didn't want to handle the alcohol? Or a Muslim caterer that didn't want to do it because they wanted pork on the menu? The Muslim company (lol) should not be forced to offer any goods or services that they would not offer to anyone else. Your hypothetical completely misses the mark. The argument is not about forcing companies to change their business. It's about preventing them from discriminating against potential customers based on prejudices, religious or otherwise. What exactly are these laws supposed to do? Appease the Christian voters in Indiana? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 (edited) The Muslim company (lol) should not be forced to offer any goods or services that they would not offer to anyone else. Your hypothetical completely misses the mark. The argument is not about forcing companies to change their business. It's about preventing them from discriminating against potential customers based on prejudices, religious or otherwise. But the Muslim company would cater the wedding if it wasn't serving alcohol. They are discriminating against alcohol drinkers. Based on the religious beliefs. It's about preventing them from discriminating against potential customers based on prejudices, religious or otherwise. Why? Why do you feel the need to force somebody to do something that goes against their religious beliefs? Why do you feel the need to take away a right that all business owners should have? Edited April 3, 2015 by FireChan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Pizza place doing well. Nice plan PC control freaks. http://www.gofundme.com/MemoriesPizza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 The Muslim company (lol) should not be forced to offer any goods or services that they would not offer to anyone else. Your hypothetical completely misses the mark. The argument is not about forcing companies to change their business. It's about preventing them from discriminating against potential customers based on prejudices, religious or otherwise. Appease the Christian voters in Indiana? Good to see we have a thread about religion so you can participate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 The Muslim company (lol) should not be forced to offer any goods or services that they would not offer to anyone else. Your hypothetical completely misses the mark. Fine...Muslim mechanic that won't change the oil in a woman's car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 The Muslim company (lol) should not be forced to offer any goods or services that they would not offer to anyone else. Your hypothetical completely misses the mark. The argument is not about forcing companies to change their business. It's about preventing them from discriminating against potential customers based on prejudices, religious or A gay wedding cake is not a product offered to anyone. There. It's settled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 Meanwhile 147 Christians in Kenya have been murdered, Iran is on a pathway to nukes and a mysterious flesh eating virus is killing people in Syria supposedly brought on by ISIS and its slaughter of thousands of people combined with its spread by sandflies. First things first though. Let's talk instead about cakes for flakes and rubbers for lesbians. What is the next canard that you libs are going to throw out there to keep the discussion off the serious issues? Well, you can always revisit "the war on women", or is that being saved for Cankle's campaign? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 Fine...Muslim mechanic that won't change the oil in a woman's car. And that would not be ok, imo. A gay wedding cake is not a product offered to anyone. There. It's settled. So the wedding cake is only into other wedding cakes? Meanwhile 147 Christians in Kenya have been murdered, Iran is on a pathway to nukes and a mysterious flesh eating virus is killing people in Syria supposedly brought on by ISIS and its slaughter of thousands of people combined with its spread by sandflies. First things first though. Let's talk instead about cakes for flakes and rubbers for lesbians. What is the next canard that you libs are going to throw out there to keep the discussion off the serious issues? Well, you can always revisit "the war on women", or is that being saved for Cankle's campaign? You should start a thread about that! Threads like this should be disallowed because, of course, it's only proper to discuss something if it's the most important thing happening. You people are ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 And that would not be ok, imo. Because...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 Because...? Because even whores with herpes should be able to get around. /Justice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964 Fity one years later are we are still debating the same things, only this time people don't want to serve the gays and not the blacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964 Fity one years later are we are still debating the same things, only this time people don't want to serve the gays and not the blacks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution Almost 240 years later and we are still debating the same thing, only this time people are dishonestly attacking Freedom of Religion (and Association) in America, and using false, simplistic examples like above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964 Fity one years later are we are still debating the same things, only this time people don't want to serve the gays and not the blacks. Not even close to comparable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 And that would not be ok, imo. So the wedding cake is only into other wedding cakes? You should start a thread about that! Threads like this should be disallowed because, of course, it's only proper to discuss something if it's the most important thing happening. You people are ridiculous. Me---"have you heard about what looks like a terrible deal with Iran that this administration is proposing"? You---"Indiana just passed a law allowing discrimination against gays" Me---"147 Christians were murdered in Kenya by Muslim terrorists". You---"Sandra Fluke isn't getting free condoms". Me---I've been reading about all of the black on black murders in Chicago. It's of epidemic proportions". You---"Remember that little black boy in Florida named Trayvon who was chased down by a white-hispanic and murdered in cold blood?" Me---"Cankles deliberately broke the law and used her own server in order to hide her communication as SOS". You---"Have you heard about the Repukicans war on women"? I could go on and on but even you should be able to see the pattern here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts