• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers


1.) false based on legality and definition they are
2.) see #1
3.) again see #1 EEO/AA protects all of us
4.) actually its based on facts, AS MY STSTMENT IS WRITTEN, its 100% true and trying to dishonestly change it to something else is a complete failure and straw man.
if you disagree simply post the law that says "i must serve gays", you will completely fail and your lie or ignorance of the law will be shown.
5.) thank you for proving me 100% right, see where you use dthe word IF, that proves me right.
maybe read the thread before you jump in the middle and totally own your own posts.

the claim was made that there is force to serve protected groupp, that is 100% false. No law exists.

what you just posted an example of AFTER the if is a law that makes ILLEGAL DISCRIMINATION a crime . . NOT simply not serving anybody who belongs to a groups/

so the fact remains i can in fact deny service to anybody i want
what i can not do is violate peoples rights or break the law
simply denying service does NOT do that

6.) i did no that and it was exactly my point, thank you for making it for me. Next time try to understand what is being discussed and you wont repeat the mistake you made. Thanks!
 

You are correct. "Tolerance" and bigotry are a two-way street. The gays who are repelled by a baker's religious beliefs and who crave to force the baker to serve them are not being tolerant, they are self-righteous gay crusaders backed force.

For those who actually are tolerant, its not that difficult. If a person does not want to trade, date, or associate with you...you move on. If you don't want to trade, date, or associate them, they move on. THAT is tolerance.

But for those that can't move on, like the gay persecutors of the baker(s), they are little more than stalkers - they just can't stand the thought of being rejected and, like all stalkers, wish to destroy those who exercise their right to associate with whom they please.

Too bad they can't be locked up.
 
Last edited:
AGENT J said:
so the answer is yes they have a choice to refuse to serve them, further proving the lies and falsehoods you have been repeating post after post completely false.

Good job on admitting you were wrong!
Click to expand...

So on what basis the fine for the Christian bakers then?

Would seem to me that the same should apply to them, that they have the right to refuse to service the alleged damaged gay couple.
What basis for the gay couple's complaint? Or are you saying that their complaint is without merit and without basis?
Or are you saying that the right to refuse to conduct business with another party isn't a right that Christian bakers of wedding cakes should be permitted?
 
can ANYBODY please post this imaginary law for me that forces me to serve gays? (or any person based on gender, race, religion, etc)

anybody?
 
AGENT J said:
wedding cakes = wedding cakes. There isnt a distinction between wther they are for interracial couple homosexual couple, bi sexual couple, christian couple etc.
once again it shows you dont understand this topic
Click to expand...

My response was to a wedding cake that had 2 brides or 2 grooms or 'Steve and Allen, marriage forever' on it.

Generic, nondescript cakes, I'm not seeing a problem. I've already stated it shouldn't matter who's buying the cake, as their money spends the same, and the same ingredients and labor are involved.
 

1.) thats what im asking you!? lol
what is it, answer the question with facts and it will solve all your misconceptions
2.) they can refuse service to anybody they want in general
3.) ahhh now you are making progress, answer that question, what is the basis . . in court . . what will be discussed . . i can assure you it most certainly wont be refusal of service
4.) no thier ACTUAL complaint is 100% justified, what you think the compliant is is worthless and not true.
5.) nope not saying that either.

you have the right to swing your fist and move about freely.
if you decide you want to swing your fist in a space somebody already is and you punch them in the face, do YOU get to complain they infringed on your right to move freely?
or do they get to complain that you assaulted them and infringed on thier rights by doing so?

if you find the TRUE, FACTUAL answer to what the complaint, case, breaking the law is about you will answer your own questions.
 
AGENT J said:
can ANYBODY please post this imaginary law for me that forces me to serve gays? (or any person based on gender, race, religion, etc)

anybody?
Click to expand...

Wouldn't what you're asking fall under the civil rights act?
 

1.) yes a WEDDING cake
2.) that wouldnt be a wedding cake then would it. like the other poster pointed out, i go in to the shop look at a book of WEDDING CAKES and tell them I want number 11. its a done deal. WHen i ask for a black guy on it and white bride they cant illegal discriminate against me based on that.
if its a genreal public access business they sell wedding cakes or they dont
 
HenryChinaski said:
Wouldn't what you're asking fall under the civil rights act?
Click to expand...

civil rights act forces me to serve people based on that stuff? explain
link to what you speak of?
 
Last edited:
So I can open a business that serves only heterosexual white males?
 
freeRadical said:
So I can open a business that serves only heterosexual white males?
Click to expand...
not enough info to accurately answer
maybe, depends on your business and reasoning :shrug:

whats your business?
 

The cake in the case you keep referring to, Sweet Cakes by Melissa, was a generic nondescript cake. It did not have any figures on it nor any writing.
 
AGENT J said:
1.) of course because i believe in protecting my fellow Americans rights
Click to expand...

And those rights you are protecting are?

2.) false since there is no force. I mean we know you keep claiming this lie but theres never any proof lol
Click to expand...

So can a business be sued if they fail to provide service to someone for a reason that is banned? Yes or no?
 

I can agree with all that. It just makes me wonder sometimes why people would choose to go into a business where they set themselves up to be offended or needing to exercise "rights" in their day to day business lives. And I don't understand how some people can be so fragile in their faith, as an example, that selling a gay person a cake will doom them to the fires of hell and eternal damnation.

And on the aside, I predicted a few weeks back that the Rangers and Kings are going to meet in the final again this year - I didn't predict a winner, but it's hard to win two in a row, so you might be in for a happy June.
 
freeRadical said:
Grocery store
Click to expand...

ok grocery store. That you want to only sell to heterosexual white males.

now whats your premise, well just change one thing for now.
WHen a heterosexual white woman walks in, loads up her buggy and gets to the cash register what happens now, whats the reason you dont sell to her?
 

'We don't offer figurines on cakes'
'We only offer matched set figures, and can't break them up'
'It's not a product configuration we offer'
 
Cause she's a woman. I wouldn't even allow her in the store.
 

The store only serves white heterosexual males, so a white heterosexual female would be obviously outside of that group. Duh??
 
Henrin said:
1.)And those rights you are protecting are?
2.)So can a business be sued if they fail to provide service to someone for a reason that is banned? Yes or no?
Click to expand...

1.) take your pick, any of the rights that are infringed on or laws broken in the many court cases that deal with this. Civil rights, equal rights etc.
2.) i cant answer until you give me more info, what buisness, what someone and what "banned reasons" do you speak off
 
AGENT J said:
civil rights act forces me to serve people based on that stuff? explain
link to what you speak of?
Click to expand...

I thought title ii of the Civil Rights Act I'm not aware that a business can get away with refusing service to a black person because they are black or to a female because they are female.
 
AGENT J said:
1.) take your pick, any of the rights that are infringed on or laws broken in the many court cases that deal with this. Civil rights, equal rights etc.
Click to expand...

Give me the name of one of these rights.

2.) i cant answer until you give me more info, what buisness, what someone and what "banned reasons" do you speak off
Click to expand...

:roll: It makes no difference at all. Can a businesses be sued for not servicing someone for a reason that is banned? Yes or no?
 
Henrin said:
The store only serves white heterosexual males, so a white heterosexual female would be obviously outside of that group. Duh??
Click to expand...

that doesnt really answer my question.
what do you tell here.

are you saying you would say "sorry lady we don't sell to any women in here"?
 
Last edited:
 
AGENT J said:
that doesnt really answer my question.
what do you tell here.

are you saying you would say "sorry lady we don't sell to any women in here"?
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what I say. She is a woman and the store doesn't sell to women. She will be removed and refused service like all other women.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…