Refusing service because of political party.

[RoadRunner79]

Interesting considering another thread about choice and what we believe.

Would you agree then, that discrimination is allowed based on what another chooses to act on, not necessarily the impulses themselves?

I think that's the metric used now to gauge what's correct, and I think it's a relatively fair one. You can refuse service to someone who chooses not to wear shoes, chooses to swear loudly, makes a fuss, etc. You can't/shouldn't if a person is handicapped and needs help, is a certain race, gender, nationality, sexuality. These things we don't choose, and it's not fair to make opinions about people based on these qualities.

For the record, I do think we have a choice in what we believe. We can choose to educate ourselves and evolve intellectually or not. Of course, you can't help it if you're an idiot, and concessions should be made for dummies.

Ok, there would be a difference then, you can’t choose who you are attracted to. But you can choose what you do afterwards. Just because you are attracted to that persons wife, doesn’t make it ok to act on that impulse. Then you can descriminate?

[Shell B]

I think that's the metric used now to gauge what's correct, and I think it's a relatively fair one. You can refuse service to someone who chooses not to wear shoes, chooses to swear loudly, makes a fuss, etc. You can't/shouldn't if a person is handicapped and needs help, is a certain race, gender, nationality, sexuality. These things we don't choose, and it's not fair to make opinions about people based on these qualities.

For the record, I do think we have a choice in what we believe. We can choose to educate ourselves and evolve intellectually or not. Of course, you can't help it if you're an idiot, and concessions should be made for dummies.

Ok, there would be a difference then, you can’t choose who you are attracted to. But you can choose what you do afterwards.  Just because you are attracted to that persons wife, doesn’t make it ok to act on that impulse. Then you can descriminate?

That makes it categorically not discrimination. "the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex."

But, yeah. You can't hate on a guy for liking someone's wife, but you can if he bangs wife. Can you turn him away at your business? I think it's a slippery slope, but maybe. Adulterers aren't a protected group. In fact, it's just another example of (some) Christians cherry-picking. They refuse service to gay people, but all the other sinners are fine. We're all technically sinners, but gay people are worthy of condemnation more? Nah, that shit comes from an innate disgust with things that are "different." We can't have people fucking up society with their inability to get past their cootie phase.

[RoadRunner79]

Ok, there would be a difference then, you can’t choose who you are attracted to. But you can choose what you do afterwards.  Just because you are attracted to that persons wife, doesn’t make it ok to act on that impulse. Then you can descriminate?

That makes it categorically not discrimination. "the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex."

But, yeah. You can't hate on a guy for liking someone's wife, but you can if he bangs wife. Can you turn him away at your business? I think it's a slippery slope, but maybe. Adulterers aren't a protected group. In fact, it's just another example of (some) Christians cherry-picking. They refuse service to gay people, but all the other sinners are fine. We're all technically sinners, but gay people are worthy of condemnation more? Nah, that shit comes from an innate disgust with things that are "different." We can't have people fucking up society with their inability to get past their cootie phase.

I don’t believe that you should be able to remove someone from your business because they are attracted to the same sex. I also don’t think that you should be able to descriminate if they do something someone thinks is wrong, but has nothing to do with the service which is being provided. This would go for both political or moral differences.

[FatAndFaithless]

That makes it categorically not discrimination. "the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex."

But, yeah. You can't hate on a guy for liking someone's wife, but you can if he bangs wife. Can you turn him away at your business? I think it's a slippery slope, but maybe. Adulterers aren't a protected group. In fact, it's just another example of (some) Christians cherry-picking. They refuse service to gay people, but all the other sinners are fine. We're all technically sinners, but gay people are worthy of condemnation more? Nah, that shit comes from an innate disgust with things that are "different." We can't have people fucking up society with their inability to get past their cootie phase.

I don’t believe that you should be able to remove someone from your business because they are attracted to the same sex. I also don’t think that you should be able to descriminate if they do something someone thinks is wrong, but has nothing to do with the service which is being provided. This would go for both political or moral differences.

Just for some clarification - so you think a restaurant owner that turns away a gay person because the owner is "acting on his conscience" or "following his religious beliefs" should be illegal?

[RoadRunner79]

I don’t believe that you should be able to remove someone from your business because they are attracted to the same sex. I also don’t think that you should be able to descriminate if they do something someone thinks is wrong, but has nothing to do with the service which is being provided. This would go for both political or moral differences.

Just for some clarification - so you think a restaurant owner that turns away a gay person because the owner is "acting on his conscience" or "following his religious beliefs" should be illegal?

Turning away the person, because of ones intolerance I would agree (as I have said before). I think this also applies to political figures as well. However I do believe that one should be able to refuse a job that goes against their conscience.

[FatAndFaithless]

Just for some clarification - so you think a restaurant owner that turns away a gay person because the owner is "acting on his conscience" or "following his religious beliefs" should be illegal?

Turning away the person, because of ones intolerance I would agree (as I have said before). I think this also applies to political figures as well. However I do believe that one should be able to refuse a job that goes against their conscience.

By refusing a job, do you mean refusing to perform one's job?  Like if a restaurant owner said "I refuse to serve gay people."  He's technically not kicking them out, but he's making it impossible for them to actually make use of his services.

[Mister Agenda]

Just to clarify, I am completely within my rights to kick someone out of my business for committing adultery with my spouse. I don't have to serve that fucker.

[RoadRunner79]

Turning away the person, because of ones intolerance I would agree (as I have said before). I think this also applies to political figures as well. However I do believe that one should be able to refuse a job that goes against their conscience.

By refusing a job, do you mean refusing to perform one's job?  Like if a restaurant owner said "I refuse to serve gay people."  He's technically not kicking them out, but he's making it impossible for them to actually make use of his services.

No, where one is objecting to the job or the specific service being asked for. Not because of who it is for. For instance those who didn’t want their names on the dresses for the Trump inauguration, vs those who would refuse to serve anyone connected with the Trump administration. I don’t think a restaraunt can justify refusing to serve food and o a person. However they should not be forced to cater a kkk rally. The question I ask, is if the job requires the paticular knowledge Of what you are rejecting, in order to preform it.

I don’t see where one could justify refusing to serve a person food, because they are gay, Republican, or Democrat.

[Brian37]

I don’t believe that you should be able to remove someone from your business because they are attracted to the same sex. I also don’t think that you should be able to descriminate if they do something someone thinks is wrong, but has nothing to do with the service which is being provided. This would go for both political or moral differences.

Just for some clarification - so you think a restaurant owner that turns away a gay person because the owner is "acting on his conscience" or "following his religious beliefs" should be illegal?

@Roadrunner.

"Reasonable accommodation" is intended for BOTH the owner and the worker and the customer. NO it was NEVER reasonable to own slaves. It was never reasonable to make blacks use separate bathrooms or sit at the back of the bus. AND NO, despite the SCOTUS GOP members advocating being cruel to their fellow citizens, IT IS NOT REASONABLE to be dicks to gays and use government to do it.

I do not understand other than you are ignorant, or in denial, why you think being a fucking dick to innocent people with force of government is ok?

Why stop at denying gay's service? Why not be as cruel as ISIS is and throw them off rooftops? They also condemn gays for religious reasons too. They are actually being more true to their religion than you are being half assed here.

Now, the good thing is that you are being half assed about not because anything the bible says, but you have enough evolutionary empathy not to be a total monster. Watered down bigotry is still bigotry.

[RoadRunner79]

I have said before, that there was a shop owner in Tennessee I believe, who put up a sign saying “no gays allowed”. I agree, that this is wrong, and should be illegal. As would a sign with any other group stated; unless you can justify that restriction.