Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dissention embrace's censorship

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

    Equality before the law means exactly that. You're the one here equating homosexuality with racial profiling, which is meaningless because religions are not questioning skin color, but some do not accept homosexuality. You just compared apples and carburetors.

    And BTW, black people already denigrate whites every chance they get, and they frequently complain about the racial make-up of everything from motion pictures to advertising. You might want to look around every once in a while and see what is actually going on. Again, you're going in the wrong direction.

    Mind if I compel you to do something extremely distasteful to yourself? And sue the crap out of you if you refuse for any reason? Personally, I would want you to refuse me because I have no right to compel you to do anything against your will, let alone dictate what you must create and/or sell.

    Here's something for you to chew on, however; all a gay couple has to do is purchase a wedding cake, go down to any average store and buy two grooms/brides/whatevers and put them on the cake themselves. So why didn't they? Because they deliberately set out to cause trouble.

    The lawsuit shows clearly that they are looking to create a public incident to advance their cause, and compelling a business owner to be their patsy is unacceptable.

    Now, go find a gay bakery and demand that they make you a large cake for a public gathering that openly bashes gays, and be sure and sue them if they refuse, which I fervently hope they do. Then call the ACLU and see if they will help you for free. (No, they won't.)
    Civil rights activists also could have sat at the back of the bus or continued to use black only water fountains. Their attempt to partake in society in the same manner as everyone else, led to them being labeled as trouble makers. The same label you've attached to homosexuals who want to be treated like everyone else.

    History repeats itself.

    "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
    - Benjamin Franklin

    The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

    Comment


    • #32
      Please critique post 24 Tact, under the law as presented the artist friend of mine can not turn down a commission of the devil, a pedophile or a Nazi, even though he has spent his life sculpting very famous hero's of the left.

      If a customer want a bronze of satin holding the Pope in an embracing man hug touching him inappropriately there is no right to refuse the job.
      Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
      Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

        The key difference here is that you guys continue to relate homosexuality to vile things. Like white supremacy, pedophilia, etc. I see homosexuality as no different than being black or white. The gay pride shirt referenced in the news article is not the equivalent of pornography or white supremacy.
        Sexual preferences and activities have always been regulated in the US. The porn industry. Making prostitution illegal. Etc., etc. What the LGBTPDQRSTUV community wants is to be able to flaunt their sexuality in public in ways no other form does. We don't have sex parades for the topless bars and prostitutes. But, we have "pride" parades that amount to the exact same thing.



        Just an example of what I mean. So, I see no reason a company can't ask for a disclaimer. They could be disagreeing with the content of the message or the way it is presented. That's a reasonable argument.

        What if companies started putting disclaimers on their products that depicted white people? Stating that their company doesn't agree with whites or their lifestyle. No problem?
        That would be racism. Different thing. A&E ran Leah Remy's series on Scientology. They put a disclaimer before each episode. Is that being anti-religious? No. It was simply the station / network saying her opinions might not be their opinions.

        Of course though, you don't view homosexuals as highly as you do heterosexual whites in the first place. That's why it's ok for you to treat them differently. If you're starting with such a low view of them, then there's really nothing I can say that would break your prejudice.


        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
          Please critique post 24 Tact, under the law as presented the artist friend of mine can not turn down a commission of the devil, a pedophile or a Nazi, even though he has spent his life sculpting very famous hero's of the left.

          If a customer want a bronze of satin holding the Pope in an embracing man hug touching him inappropriately there is no right to refuse the job.
          I've already addressed it. You continue to compare entirely different situations. There is nothing pornographic or lewd about the shirt requested in your article. So it's not comparable to a lewd sculpture. Someone could very well turn down a man and woman holding each other inappropriately as well.
          "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
          - Benjamin Franklin

          The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

          Comment


          • #35
            Treating people equally is not really a difficult concept.

            If you don't want to do lewd or pornographic work, no one is saying that you have to. Turning down pornographic requests is not discriminatory as it would apply to everyone. Gay or straight.

            But, if you would make a shirt that says 'straight pride' while turning down one that says 'gay pride', then that is obvious discrimination.

            "We like Marysville the way it is", she said. "But as far as having a black couple moving in, we have no problem with that. but where it's wrong is when you have a white wife and a black husband together, that's wrong, and vice versa."

            When a reporter pressed her on why she thinks a mixed marriage is wrong, Cramer replied that it's "simply against the bible."
            https://deadstate.org/mi-city-counci...nst-the-bible/

            Let's say this woman was a painter. Would you be ok with her refusing to paint portraits of interracial couples, based on her religious beliefs?

            Where do we draw the line?
            "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
            - Benjamin Franklin

            The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
              Treating people equally is not really a difficult concept.

              If you don't want to do lewd or pornographic work, no one is saying that you have to. Turning down pornographic requests is not discriminatory as it would apply to everyone. Gay or straight.

              But, if you would make a shirt that says 'straight pride' while turning down one that says 'gay pride', then that is obvious discrimination.



              https://deadstate.org/mi-city-counci...nst-the-bible/

              Let's say this woman was a painter. Would you be ok with her refusing to paint portraits of interracial couples, based on her religious beliefs?

              Where do we draw the line?
              You have attempted to hijack the OP into a gay rights question. The OP is a free speech question. Free speech is not reserved only for citizens who are gay. Free Speech is not about agreeing with the speech. You are very good at diverting the topic into a whoa is me, I'm a minority who is easily offended and have thin skin, And therefore nobody should disagree with me.
              That was the reason the Free Speech Movement began, because at that time, Gays were the ones being shouted down.
              Now, the gays are adamant that only one opinion should be protected speech.
              Free Speech and the 1st amendment says all forms of speech is protected speech.
              Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
              Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post

                You have attempted to hijack the OP into a gay rights question. The OP is a free speech question. Free speech is not reserved only for citizens who are gay. Free Speech is not about agreeing with the speech. You are very good at diverting the topic into a whoa is me, I'm a minority who is easily offended and have thin skin, And therefore nobody should disagree with me.
                That was the reason the Free Speech Movement began, because at that time, Gays were the ones being shouted down.
                Now, the gays are adamant that only one opinion should be protected speech.
                Free Speech and the 1st amendment says all forms of speech is protected speech.
                It's free speech on the basis of being able to exercise one's religion, as that has been the stated reason for denying gay customers or gay products in general. So it is fair to ask if business owners should be able to cite their religion to deny products that involve interracial marriage. Is that acceptable or not? Should we allow Christians to stone their children in the street, so they have the freedom to practice their religion? Law has always trumped religion in the US. Why should that suddenly stop at discrimination? We already have limits set on all religions.

                Secondly, you cannot have a discussion about freedom without analyzing which routes make the country more free as a whole.
                Last edited by TactiKill J.; 25 Aug 19, 16:17.
                "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
                - Benjamin Franklin

                The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

                Comment


                • #38
                  The Bible says that parents should stone disobedient children to death. I would ask if you agree with something like this, but you stated that free speech isn't about agreeing with the speech. As such, by your logic, Christians should be afforded the freedom to do so, regardless of what the law says or the rest of society thinks of the practice.
                  "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
                  - Benjamin Franklin

                  The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
                    The business owner at the center of the story in the OP prints T-Shirts, which is a form of graphic arts. Not a baker, or a catering business. What if this art business was a sculpture?
                    The following scenario is in fact real, it involves a person I have known for the past 6 years. He is an art teacher and has sculptures all over the world. He has made sculptures of Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, Gandhi, RFK, Harvey Milk, The Tuskegee Airmen, Jesus Christ, Mother Teresa, John the Baptist, Knut Rockne and Nelson Mandela. He has works on display in many parks, universities, museums, cathedrals and public buildings in several countries.
                    What if he refused a commission to make a bust of Adolf Hitler? One must remember that once a precedence is made it can be used by any party.
                    The man you talk about in the original post would not sell an item to an LGBT person.. he has the same ideology as an isil member or Klansman. He may have freedom of speech but he has the ideology of a monster. Just think of how it will be like if an LGBT person refused to sell a T-shirt to me and you because we are white Christians
                    Long live the Lionheart! Please watch this video
                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=jRDwlR4zbEM
                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3DBaY0RsxU
                    Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.

                    George S Patton

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Muslims could cite their religious beliefs and refuse service to all whites. But, for some odd reason I doubt these white conservatives would be going to bat for their freedom of speech.
                      "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
                      - Benjamin Franklin

                      The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
                        Muslims could cite their religious beliefs and refuse service to all whites. But, for some odd reason I doubt these white conservatives would be going to bat for their freedom of speech.
                        Bad example, a better example would be a Muslim restaurant owner refusing to serve pork,.
                        If you hired a Muslim restaurant to cater a wedding and they turned you down because you wanted to serve pork.
                        Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
                        Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post

                          The man you talk about in the original post would not sell an item to an LGBT person.. he has the same ideology as an isil member or Klansman. He may have freedom of speech but he has the ideology of a monster. Just think of how it will be like if an LGBT person refused to sell a T-shirt to me and you because we are white Christians
                          Do you have proof that the business owner has anything in common with ISIL or the Klan other than conjecture?

                          The entire discussion comes down to "The feelings " of the LGBT community.
                          Roe vs. Wade was decided on the pretense that abortion was protected under the right to privacy. Does the business owner have the same right to privacy? Is it anyone else's business why the power decided to turn down a job?
                          Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
                          Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post

                            Bad example, a better example would be a Muslim restaurant owner refusing to serve pork,.
                            If you hired a Muslim restaurant to cater a wedding and they turned you down because you wanted to serve pork.
                            No, because pork wouldn't be on the menu. I can't go to McDonald's and then demand a steak. That's not discrimination.

                            To make your example accurate it would have to be a Muslim restaurant refusing to cater a Christian wedding, despite them asking for items they would normally serve. To that, yes there would be an issue. That would be discrimination against Christians.
                            "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
                            - Benjamin Franklin

                            The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

                              It's free speech on the basis of being able to exercise one's religion, as that has been the stated reason for denying gay customers or gay products in general. So it is fair to ask if business owners should be able to cite their religion to deny products that involve interracial marriage. Is that acceptable or not? Should we allow Christians to stone their children in the street, so they have the freedom to practice their religion? Law has always trumped religion in the US. Why should that suddenly stop at discrimination? We already have limits set on all religions.

                              Secondly, you cannot have a discussion about freedom without analyzing which routes make the country more free as a whole.
                              The one point I agree with you on is if a business owner declines to sell general goods to a person because of sexual orientation.
                              There is a difference between selling a t-shirt off the shelf to a person and making custom made to order shirt.
                              The same is true of the bakery, if I ran a bakery and have cookies and cakes on the shelves and a gay couple walked in and asked for one, no problem. If the couple comes in and asked me to make a custom cake with decorations I decided where offensive to me, which party is the winning hand?
                              The shop owner who takes offense to the request or the couple who are offended by the denial of service.?
                              If I sell t-shirts and someone asked me to make a shirt with an obvious racist slur I should be able to deny them service if it offended me. But wouldn't that offend the racist?
                              The point of free speech has nothing to do with feelings.
                              Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
                              Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

                                No, because pork wouldn't be on the menu. I can't go to McDonald's and then demand a steak. That's not discrimination.

                                To make your example accurate it would have to be a Muslim restaurant refusing to cater a Christian wedding, despite them asking for items they would normally serve. To that, yes there would be an issue. That would be discrimination against Christians.
                                Pork would be on the menu if it were up to me. So now you offended me. A catering business owned by a Muslim or for that matter a Jew would by religious beliefs be unable to fill the order and thereby would hurt my feelings.
                                Why couldn't I bring a suit against them?
                                Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
                                Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X