- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: AZ Senate Passes 'Right to Discriminate' Bill
Posted on 2/20/14 at 6:41 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
Posted on 2/20/14 at 6:41 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
Now, I am clearly all for gay rights and would be happy for that to be added to a protected class.
There should be no protected classes at all.
If anything, the only argument I can see are the handicapped. Those are the truly disadvantaged.
2
Posted on 2/20/14 at 6:42 pm to Scruffy
quote:
If people want turn down perfectly good money from someone for something as idiotic as their skin color, religion, or sexual orientation, that is their loss.
Exactly. That's a way the market regulates itself.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 6:42 pm to Sentrius
quote:
There should be no protected classes at all.
I live in the "what IS" world. Not the "what SHOULD be" world.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 6:43 pm to asurob1
quote:
You still don't get it.
The government is attempting (I say attempting because this will die a blood expensive death in the courts) to make it okay to discriminate based on race, sexual orientation, etc etc etc.
All you have to do now is say selling groceries to black folk is against your religion.
It's not your property. Discrimination is morally reprehensible, but as I have so often been told by those on the left, it is not up to the government to legislate morality.
People do all kinds of things that I find reprehensible, but that doesn't mean I think the government ought to make all of them illegal.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 6:44 pm to asurob1
quote:
I am in favor of the federal government in forcing a bakery to sell products to all citizens regardless of their race, sexual orientation or shoe size.
Why?
Posted on 2/20/14 at 6:44 pm to LordSaintly
quote:
I'm saying that a business owner who is dumb enough to do this wouldn't be in business for very long.
This. Arizona is only like 55% non-Hispanic white... Talk about setting a business up for failure. That's not even considering whites that would boycott any establishment that had a "whites only" policy.
Then again, Asurob1 is the King of Hyperbole. I doubt he believes this will lead to a new Jim Crow era in Arizona. I think this has more to do with his hatred of religion.
quote:
Factually incorrect.
Race, Sex, and Religion are Constitutionally protected classes. So, this law cannot okay that.
This post was edited on 2/20/14 at 6:46 pm
Posted on 2/20/14 at 6:47 pm to asurob1
Why do you hate freedom?
Posted on 2/20/14 at 6:47 pm to asurob1
quote:
So every business that has a "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone at our discretion" or a "No shirt, no shoes, no service" sign is run by evil, discriminating bigots?
I think this is a legit question that you are avoiding
Posted on 2/20/14 at 6:49 pm to GoBigOrange86
quote:
I have so often been told by those on the left, it is not up to the government to legislate morality.
I hate hypocrisy worse than lying.
This thread is one blatant display of hypocrisy considering the OP's rhetoric on letting people do whatever they want being pro choice and pro gay marriage and I agree with him on those two issues.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 6:49 pm to Patrick O Rly
quote:
If people want turn down perfectly good money from someone for something as idiotic as their skin color, religion, or sexual orientation, that is their loss.
The color green transcends any other color 90% of the time.
In the current age of social media, an issue of perceived discrimination would be dealt with swiftly and would be more efficient than a court system
Posted on 2/20/14 at 6:52 pm to asurob1
quote:
I WON! I WON!!!
But seriously, like you, I don't want to go back to the dark days of Jim Crow where people are disqualified by the color of their skin from participating in things like Miss Black America, Miss Black USA, Miss Black Universe, scholarship programs run by the United Negro College Fund, etc.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 7:02 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
quote:
This bill lets me declare that it's against my religion to serve muslims, mexicans, blacks, gays, women, etc etc etc.
-----------------------------------------------
Factually incorrect.
Race, Sex, and Religion are Constitutionally protected classes. So, this law cannot okay that.
Sexual Orientation is NOT.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 7:05 pm to 90proofprofessional
90proof, I shopped the white box out of your Avi.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 7:09 pm to Sentrius
Posted on 2/20/14 at 7:09 pm to asurob1
Why do you hate freedom of association?
Posted on 2/20/14 at 7:11 pm to asurob1
Ok so let me get this straight: the majority party passes something along party lines and will soon be the law of the land(Arizona)? I thought the minority party was just supposed to suck it up since it is THE LAW OF THE LAND
Posted on 2/20/14 at 8:04 pm to Scruffy
quote:
Fine by me.
Apparently, the bill is so broad that you would be allowed to discriminate against anyone you wish.
I have absolutely zero issues with that.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 8:08 pm to fleaux
quote:
Ok so let me get this straight: the majority party passes something along party lines and will soon be the law of the land(Arizona)? I thought the minority party was just supposed to suck it up since it is THE LAW OF THE LAND
Well that is what you're suppose to do IF you believe in Democracy, but screw that sheeeeittttt.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 8:13 pm to asurob1
quote:
asurob1
What problem do you have with a state upholding the 1st amendment?
Posted on 2/20/14 at 8:16 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Okay. But there is a difference between discriminating and not offering a particular product or service. You seem to think that not offering a particular product or service is discrimination.
Nope.
Wrong again.
I think that offering cake toppers to one couple but not another because you know...icky lesbians is discrimination.
See the difference?
I doubt it.
Page 3 of 36
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News