Marriage Equality and Other MOGAI/Queer Rights

[Severus_S]

I'd support the homosexual community if:

 

* they paid me

* they gave me free food

* they gave me something worth money

* they gave me a fish tank of considerable size

 

 

But I support y'all in your pursuit of happiness and all.

(Did you see it? Don't call me a homophobe)

TROLL???

[Fuzzbucket]

TROLL???

Yup. Homophobic troll, at that

[Slaskia]

What do you folks think of stories like this?

 

Christian florist getting sued by state for refusing to provide flowers for gay wedding (yeah, it's TheBlaze: I wouldn't recommend reading the comments)

 

There's apparently been other cases like this, where the Christian business ended up getting shut down for discrimination. And it's likely that this one will end up shut down too....

 

My question is: why not just go to a different florist? The business owner, private ones anyway, is entitled to chose who s/he wants to do business with.

 

Edited to add: just to add so folks don't misunderstand: I don't agree with the business owners 'opinion' in this case, but I also don't like the precedent that the states are going after these business owners because of their Christian beliefs.

Edited April 10, 2013 by Slaskia

[Riverwillows]

Actually, if I was gay and planning a wedding, and the florist I first picked out refused when they found out it was a gay wedding, I'd just go with another and spread the word online about the florist.

 

The only reason I can see taking it to court, would be to make a statement, and an example. Like a Christian florist refusing to do a Jewish or Muslim wedding.

 

They are wrong as hell, but if they are small independent businesses, then unfortunately, yes, they have the right to choose. If I had a small business, I'd want the right to choose not to deal with, say, Hell's Angels, or Neo Nazi's, things like that.

Edited April 10, 2013 by Riverwillows

[brairtrainer]

What do you folks think of stories like this?

 

Christian florist getting sued by state for refusing to provide flowers for gay wedding (yeah, it's TheBlaze: I wouldn't recommend reading the comments)

 

There's apparently been other cases like this, where the Christian business ended up getting shut down for discrimination. And it's likely that this one will end up shut down too....

 

My question is: why not just go to a different florist? The business owner, private ones anyway, is entitled to chose who s/he wants to do business with.

 

Edited to add: just to add so folks don't misunderstand: I don't agree with the business owners 'opinion' in this case, but I also don't like the precedent that the states are going after these business owners because of their Christian beliefs.

On one hand I don't believe the buisness owner should be sued for denying buisness because of his personal religious beliefs. On the other hand I kinda see it as descrimination since you can't refuse buisness (in most cases) due to race or sex.

 

Instead of sit ins and protests though they are sueing the buisness so I'm more on the side of lets wait and see what happens.

[Mtntopview]

Actually that isn't true. I've had paid jobs and volunteer jobs. In EVERY case the people being paid (including me) were far less committed to their jobs, to working hard and the rest, than the volunteers, who would move heaven and earth to get to work and do their jobs no matter what.

 

Part of this is because bosses who pay you seem to feel it's OK to exploit you as it's THEIR money. So - human nature - you exploit them right back. If I'm not allowed compassionate time off when my daughter is miscarrying, then even when I am close to a deadline I am NOT making the effort to come in to work the day after a migraine. (For the record, my line manager told me to go to my daughter and she would take the flak... but I couldn't take senior management seriously after that.)

 

Volunteers are working in an area they feel passionate about. Jobs are on the whole primarily for the money. We are all lucky if we find one we really care about.

 

However, Mtntopview,

 

 

I hope you also apply this principle to your support for every other group in society ? If not - then yes, you are a homophobe, just the same.

So, what I got from the bolded part was:

 

If you support gays and lesbians Yay, of you don't, then your a Homophobe? That sounds like extremism to me.

[brairtrainer]

So, what I got from the bolded part was:

 

If you support gays and lesbians Yay, of you don't, then your a Homophobe? That sounds like extremism to me.

@mntpntveiw she is taking thing from what you have said earlier in other places of the forum to draw her conclusions. She's stating that since you are saying you won't support them unless given stuff to do so and then claiming no-homophobe makes it look like you are one.

[Riverwillows]

Should we feed the troll? If it is, in fact, a troll?? Just wondering.

[Alpha Gryph]

What do you folks think of stories like this?

 

Christian florist getting sued by state for refusing to provide flowers for gay wedding (yeah, it's TheBlaze: I wouldn't recommend reading the comments)

 

There's apparently been other cases like this, where the Christian business ended up getting shut down for discrimination.  And it's likely that this one will end up shut down too....

 

My question is:  why not just go to a different florist?  The business owner,  private ones anyway, is entitled to chose who s/he wants to do business with.

 

Edited to add:  just to add so folks don't misunderstand: I don't agree with the business owners 'opinion' in this case, but I also don't like the precedent that the states are going after these business owners because of their Christian beliefs.

Refusing service to someone because of their sexual orientation sounds an awful lot like refusing service to someone who's, say, African American...it's all discrimination.

 

Though I don't think finding another florist would've been difficult. If she wants to lose business because of her beliefs, then so be it.

Edited April 10, 2013 by Alpha Gryph

[Mtntopview]

Refusing service to someone because of their sexual orientation sounds an awful lot like refusing service to someone who's, say, African American...it's all discrimination.

 

Though I don't think finding another florist would've been difficult. If she wants to lose business because of her beliefs, then so be it.

Maybe they refused service in order to avoid complexities that could occur by hiring a homosexual.

[brairtrainer]

Maybe they refused service in order to avoid complexities that could occur by hiring a homosexual.

What complexities are there when you hire a homosexual pray tell?

 

Also it wasn't because the person wanted to be hired, the person wanted to hire the florist to do the flowers for their wedding. Go back and re-read the article as you seem to have misunderstood what it was trying to say.

[Riverwillows]

(choke...cough) Are you implying that to hire a gay person would provide complications for a business beyond the usual employee ones???

 

That is so laughable and sad at the same time. I have worked with tons of gays in my time (I'm retired), my roomate is gay (my age) and works full time, and never once was the gay factor even an issue in any way at those jobs. Most of my gay friends never had any either.

 

I need to ask you, what is your real idea of gays? You have never been quite clear. You just pop in, make a loaded statement, and that's it. What is your real agenda here in this thread? Just to troll it and cause issues? Or a real concern? Please enlighten.

Edited April 10, 2013 by Riverwillows

[Mtntopview]

What I am saying is that a business could lose trusted customers if they hired a gay or lesbian. This is depending on where it is of course, but more anti-gay areas will not support a business hiring homosexuals, and may not take their money there. Also, by hiring them, there is a chance the employees who are strait may harass the new employee, and so they are avoiding this situation by not hiring what may be the cause of bullying. So maybe it was that if the business hired a gay/lesbian, there was a chance it could be very damaged by the loss of revenue.

 

 

What do I think of Gays? I really don't care to much about them. I think they should he treated equally under the law. Which means that they are no better than strait people. If you do a PDA as a gay, your just as wrong as a strait person doing a PDA. But I also see how people can find them sick, as I still have trouble accepting them (although I do try). I am worried that gays will go the way of the feminist, and have the pendulum swing to the other side. This needs an example or it'll look bad, so I'll give a few:

 

 

 

Women can say a man raped her and the man will have a hard time fighting the case, especially if he is black. There is a good peice on 60 minutes about this, I'll try and find it.

 

Anther example is the African American issue. Now there is colleges discriminating against whites, preferring black people over white people. Also, the shooting of the African American kid a while back (I forgot the name of the kid, sorry). The man probably saw a hoodlum walking through his neighborhood and went to confront him. The kid ended up being shot. And people were outraged because the shooter was white and the kid was black. The thing that was wrong was that people looked to the white guy as a villain. What happened to "Innocent until prooven guilty"?

 

 

 

So in other words, I support that everyone is accountable for what they do, and should have a fair chance of defending themselves in a court of law.

 

(Does that answer your questions?)

Edited April 10, 2013 by Mtntopview

[Riverwillows]

Yes...yes it does, more than you may think, especially if your profile is correct, and you are only 16. You have a lot of learning to do. A lot.

[Mtntopview]

Yup, That I do. But I don't like gays having mor rights than straights, just because people feel sorry for them. If they want equality, they will get all of it. There should be no programs to help them, because that would be unfair to people who are not gay. This applies to all minorities. The same with women rights, Latino rights, and African American rights.

[brairtrainer]

 

(Does that answer your questions?)

It answers some of mine but it leads me to ask a few others.

 

1. Most of the time you can't tell if someone is homosexual by the way they dress and act, so if everyone is to be treated under the law should the gay person have the right to protest the fact they weren't hired or were fired was because of their sexuality?

 

2. If everyone is to be seen under the law as equal then shouldn't gays be allowed to marry so that they have the same rights as other couples such as but not limited to; no estate tax when their loved one dies, being allowed to adopt their partners child or a child from the state with their partner, being noted as next of kin when their loved one is in the hospital so they may be allowed to determine treatment and/or say good bye if nothing more can be done, get the avilable tax credits, be able to file jointly? (Note: Civil Unions as of this time are not always seen by the federal government as being valid and several other rights are still restricted because of the document not being a marriage)

 

3. Should states be allowed to say that they won't honor the marriage if the couple is in the state visiting family, vactioning etc. and therefore allowed to keep those rights as they move over states borders in the US?

 

Edit: I hope you don't feel like I'm targeting you, but because you've now come out on your position I'm curious to understand more so that I understand your previous posts.

Edited April 10, 2013 by brairtrainer

[Mtntopview]

It answers some of mine but it leads me to ask a few others.

 

1. Most of the time you can't tell if someone is homosexual by the way they dress and act, so if everyone is to be treated under the law should the gay person have the right to protest the fact they weren't hired or were fired was because of their sexuality?

 

2. If everyone is to be seen under the law as equal then shouldn't gays be allowed to marry so that they have the same rights as other couples such as but not limited to; no estate tax when their loved one dies, being allowed to adopt their partners child or a child from the state with their partner, being noted as next of kin when their loved one is in the hospital so they may be allowed to determine treatment and/or say good bye if nothing more can be done, get the avilable tax credits, be able to file jointly? (Note: Civil Unions as of this time are not always seen by the federal government as being valid and several other rights are still restricted because of the document not being a marriage)

 

3. Should states be allowed to say that they won't honor the marriage if the couple is in the state visiting family, vactioning etc. and therefore allowed to keep those rights as they move over states borders in the US?

 

Edit: I hope you don't feel like I'm targeting you, but because you've now come out on your position I'm curious to understand more so that I understand your previous posts.

1- they should be able to sue the company, or take it to court. That's what they should do, and I support it fully. But I don't think they should hold protests, or try shut the company down. Re bee, companies only give the customers what they want, and that means that they thought that society would not buy from them if they hired a homosexual. I beleive that there is always two sides to a story, and both should be allowed to speak. (Yes, I do think the anti-gay community has some good points)

 

2- True, although I'd prefer that marriage be kept for straight couples only. This is because it is a tradition, and homosexuals would break that. I think that Civil unions should be treated the same as marriage, and should have all the same rights as a normal marriage. This means that all marriage would be is just a name, and names don't really matter.

 

3- it would be easier to do that yes, and more efficient. The national government should decide this issue because it would shut both sides up. Also it would make everything easier on the states and the couples. The states don't have to target individuals and look bad, and the gays retain their rights. Win win situation.

 

(No, I don't feel like your targeting me)

[Completely Different]

 

2- True, although I'd prefer that marriage be kept for straight couples only. This is because it is a tradition, and homosexuals would break that. I think that Civil unions should be treated the same as marriage, and should have all the same rights as a normal marriage. This means that all marriage would be is just a name, and names don't really matter.

 

It’s not really a tradition, though. The concept of marriage is old. Like,really old; you can see it in practically every human culture throughout history. Furthermore, what constitutes as marriage has changed millions of times. There have been periods were divorce was impossible, or could only performed by men, etc. There have been periods where a man could have multiple wives or concubines, or more rarely, women could have multiple husbands. At this point, you could probably consider almost anything part of a traditional wedding ceremony.

 

You might be able to say, “Okay, but it’s a tradition for modern Americans [Or Insert Country without Gay Marriage Here]”, but I don’t think even that holds up. If it’s a bad tradition, one that actively harms people, you shouldn’t keep it. Banning gay marriage isn’t analogous fireworks on New Year’s Eve or cakes on birthdays.

 

[Severus_S]

2- True, although I'd prefer that marriage be kept for straight couples only. This is because it is a tradition, and homosexuals would break that. I think that Civil unions should be treated the same as marriage, and should have all the same rights as a normal marriage. This means that all marriage would be is just a name, and names don't really matter.

 

 

 

Ah, so You think every tradition should be kept intact because tardition is a value in itself?

[sarcasm on]

Very well.... so..what if I might like to go back to the good old roman tradition of feeding Christians to the lions?

Or maybe we could could burn some witches?

Hm..or maybe (I'm heathen) I would like to make some human sacrifices?

 

All traditional.... so I suppose You are all for it?

[sarcasm off]

[brairtrainer]

Okay looking at what you've said I have to ask some more questions, because though I understand your view more some things aren't really clicking with me.

 

1. What good points do you think the Anti-Gay community has and why?

 

2. You do realize that in other religions and in older socities that gay marriage was okay? What about countries like Sweden, Denmark, New Zealand, Australia, France*, Canada et al. who allow for marriage to be between two persons regardless of gender? Are they really breaking a tradition that needs to be upheld because of the story/identity that is important or are they deciding that something is more important than tradition?

 

3. I really get where you are coming at with civil unions. I and I think another member on this board feel similarly (I think its philpot?) but we take different phliosophies. His is that marriage as it stands should only be touched to make everone have a civil union with everyones benifits being that of what was originally determined by the state to mean marriage. Mine falls under civil unions being prefered but due to reactions from both sides that see this in a negative light I think everything will happen faster and cleaner if we just give gays the right to marry and be done with it. Where do you sit with this? (I think I may already know just confirming my answer)

 

@philpot--if you see this and I was incorrect about your views please pm me or post here so I can fix my post

 

*France does everything as a civil marriage, meaning you have to be married at the courthouse before you can marry at a church for it to be legally counted

[Svataben]

Ah, so You think every tradition should be kept intact because tardition is a value in itself?

[sarcasm on]

Very well.... so..what if I might like to go back to the good old roman tradition of feeding Christians to the lions?

Or maybe we could could burn some witches?

Hm..or maybe (I'm heathen) I would like to make some human sacrifices?

 

All traditional.... so I suppose You are all for it?

[sarcasm off]

I'm soooo agreeing with you!

 

It's also tradition that women be subservient to men, and that a large part of the world makes money off the slavery of black people. YAY traditions!

[PointOfOrigin]

*France does everything as a civil marriage, meaning you have to be married at the courthouse before you can marry at a church for it to be legally counted

Most of the Europe functions that way - it's one of the Napoleon's legacies.

[brairtrainer]

Most of the Europe functions that way - it's one of the Napoleon's legacies.

I noted that with France because it was the only one I knew for sure.

[Mtntopview]

Okay looking at what you've said I have to ask some more questions, because though I understand your view more some things aren't really clicking with me.

 

1. What good points do you think the Anti-Gay community has and why?

 

2. You do realize that in other religions and in older socities that gay marriage was okay? What about countries like Sweden, Denmark, New Zealand, Australia, France*, Canada et al. who allow for marriage to be between two persons regardless of gender? Are they really breaking a tradition that needs to be upheld because of the story/identity that is important or are they deciding that something is more important than tradition?

 

3. I really get where you are coming at with civil unions. I and I think another member on this board feel similarly (I think its philpot?) but we take different phliosophies. His is that marriage as it stands should only be touched to make everone have a civil union with everyones benifits being that of what was originally determined by the state to mean marriage. Mine falls under civil unions being prefered but due to reactions from both sides that see this in a negative light I think everything will happen faster and cleaner if we just give gays the right to marry and be done with it. Where do you sit with this? (I think I may already know just confirming my answer)

 

@philpot--if you see this and I was incorrect about your views please pm me or post here so I can fix my post

 

*France does everything as a civil marriage, meaning you have to be married at the courthouse before you can marry at a church for it to be legally counted

1- again, I think that Marriage is a tradition, and should be left as it is. I think gays should work on improving civil unions, rather than trying to get marriage rights. (Just my opinion, don't say anything sarcastic please, as I am not interested in having them reviewed or used to insult me)

 

2- I am saying the American Marriage. Between a man and a woman. The issue is more symbolism than actuall rights to me. I think (again) that they should work on improving civil unions.

 

3- I think that Gays should work on making Civil unions better, that way the anti-gay marriage advocates are appeased because marriage is left alone. It may take more time, but as the expression goes, "quality takes time".

[PointOfOrigin]

I noted that with France because it was the only one I knew for sure.

I was kind of surprised when I heard that it's not like that everywhere. To me, that's really simple and natural. I mean, everyone benefits from it.