Say Jones is an architect who has a small, one-man office in town and is known for the artistic, aesthetic quality of several residences he has designed in the area. One day as he is sketching design ideas, Rojer and Troy, two homosexual men, walk in and tell him they admire a house he did and want him to design one for them. But they have an aesthetic idea of their own they want him to follow.
On a trip to Tibet a couple years before, they explain, they had been quite fascinated with the way many houses there feature phallus-shaped forms in various parts of their design. The two tell Jones that as a gay couple, they like this phallus motif very much and want him to use it throughout the house he does for them. They confide that they plan to have some very sensuous all-male parties in their new house, and they make clear they want some of its design details to depict phalluses quite graphically, because they think that will lend to the erotic ambiance they want to create.
Not only does all this offend Jones's aesthetic and artistic sensibilities, but he is also a devout, fundamentalist Christian. As such, he believes homosexuality is immoral and an abomination that should be discouraged, rather than celebrated--let alone celebrated in his designs. He does not want these clients. Can he refuse them because they are homosexuals without violating his state's law, if it prohibits public accommodations from discriminating on the basis of sexual preference, and defines "public accommodation" to include any "business"?
i'll add that to the list.:lol: I was not aware business was listed in the commerce clause.
i'll add that to the list.
Another primer for you, there are 591 days till the next election. Cheers!Another primer for you...until you pass that amendment, the govt has the power to make discrimination illegal
Another primer for you, there are 591 days till the next election. Cheers!
Because of such cases like Elane Photography it has compelled at least 30 states to tighten their laws in regard to such superfluous cases to ward off the wolves that are ready and willing to deny the basic rights of others in the name of their cause. Rather selfish when you boil it all down.
Yes, 591 days until we elect another dem president.
I don't view attempts by government to infringe a person's freedom of speech as superfluous. And if there was any wolf who was ready and willing to use a constitutionally dubious law to deny another person this basic right in the name of her cause, it was the woman who forced Elaine to celebrate her homosexual wedding in photographs. Rather selfish of this lesbian when you boil it all down.
Faux liberals have as much contempt for the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment as they do for the right guaranteed by the Second.
Really? after all this hopelessness and no change left in the pockets of millions you have confidence that a Dem will win the presidency? Wow, you are a dreamer. :lamo Most folks I talk to who voted for Obama are saying he was one big ass mistake. They don't much care for his hopelessness and no change. Their concerns are all over the place, some with the incompetence of foreign affairs. Others aren't real happy with the attack on religious freedoms. I have friends of many colors and none of them are real thrilled with that one. I love my liberal friends and respect them even more when they admit their choice was a wrong one. Cheers!
Your attempt to derail this into a discussion about the election is a FAIL
Please provide such a claim by link. Governor Pence would not of signed such a bill if it included such stipulations. Please produce......
LOL, he was hounded into resigning because he supported (contributed money in support of) a constitutional amendment to deny the benefits of marriage to homosexuals and effectively impose his view of "marriage" onto the entire state, permanently, while heading an organization full of those whose rights he was gleefully attempting to permanently limit.
A "world of difference" for whom, compared to what? We all have personal and privately held views (that is as true of the people of Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union as it is here) but no one would suggest that their dissidents should have been persecuted merely because they wanted to "impose" their view of a free society on others.And there is a world of difference between a personal view of marriage - don't like gay marriage, don't get gay married! - and contributing money to an effort that would impose his personal view on everyone else. It's the difference between being personally against keeping guns at home, and supporting a law that would ban guns.
Would a gun maker in Texas support a CEO who contributed money to a constitutional amendment to ban guns? Of course not. Would that gun maker support a CEO who made a personal decision to not own guns or keep them in his home? Why not, especially if that person didn't publicly advertise his personal choice.
I don't view attempts by government to infringe a person's freedom of speech .
The untold millions Indiana has already lost due to corporations pulling their conventions is not faux. I gave Pence much more credit than this and respected him a great deal. He'll get it when he starts losing huge sports events--didn't learn much from Arizona did he ?
It depends, doesn't it? If your "conscience" tells you Jews are the devil and you want to run them out of town, and so you will refuse them service and otherwise make them unwelcome, I don't think laws that allow that are particularly "laudable." And they're clearly not always constitutionally 'mandated' - that also depends on what your conscience is telling you and who acts based on that affect....
I wasn't getting into an argument on the right of people to contribute to prop 8, I was pointing out the significant influence of religion on the proposition, which I feel at this point is a sufficiently beaten and deceased equine.
sexual orientation isn't covered by Indiana's state anti-discrimination laws.
Should LGBT Hoosiers Be Protected From Discrimination? | News - Indiana Public Media
sexual orientation isn't covered by Indiana's state anti-discrimination laws.
Should LGBT Hoosiers Be Protected From Discrimination? | News - Indiana Public Media
That's too bad. Nobody should have the right to demand someone else's labor. That isn't a free society.
The design of the house can be seen as an expression of his aesthetic, so he could refuse to design such a house because it is not his aesthetic.
Design style is the architects "stock in trade" and it is within their rights to refuse to design a house that is not consistent with their own aesthetic.
this particular bill was to protect religious freedoms much like 30 state governors have signed into law after the fiasco over cake decorators, florists and photographers were ripped in federal courts mainly due to the lack of protection at the state level. . Are you against religious freedoms? I read it and it had nothing in it that discriminated against anyone.. So what's the beef?
And what about the person denied access to society simply because someone doesn't like who they are and not because of their character?
this particular bill was to protect religious freedoms much like 30 state governors have signed into law after the fiasco over cake decorators, florists and photographers were ripped in federal courts mainly due to the lack of protection at the state level. . Are you against religious freedoms? I read it and it had nothing in it that discriminated against anyone.. So what's the beef?
I'm against discrimination in places of public accommodation. If you want to discriminate start a club for heterosexuals only.
I'm against any discrimination that would deny any citizen constitutional right to moral conscience. To me that is the epitome of stealing a man's soul. Have a nice day.I'm against discrimination in places of public accommodation. If you want to discriminate start a club for heterosexuals only.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?