TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:699]

[Peter King]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

They are a public business... once you open the doors to the public you can't discriminate against some. I hear what you are saying though. There should be a simple law that states that a business can state whom they will or won't serve upfront. Against anyone for any reason. The public will decide if they stay in business or not with their wallets. IF a business does not state it then they are open to anti-discrimination laws.

I disagree with you, normal businesses should never be allowed to ban people from their doors except on very specific, valid and non-discriminatory reasons.

A business should refuse to serve/sell to someone if the person has stolen from them, refuses to pay their bills, is too young to be allowed inside or the service/goods are not appropriate or allowed for anyone under the age of 18 or 21, or if they are drunk/stoned/unsanitary/violate decent dress code in such a manner that it is illegal or extremely improper/etc.

Reasons like that can be absolutely perfectly legal for refusal of service/selling, but refusing someone service because you don't like them, don't like how they look, because they are on parole, they are black, hispanic, white, asian, gay, lesbian, obese, too tall, too obese, have a handicap, etc. etc. should not be allowed.

You should not be able to escape prosecution from discrimination laws by posting "no blacks allowed" or "no gays allowed" or "no muslims/jews allowed".

That at least is my opinion.

 

[Bodi]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

Then do they have the right to pursue their happiness or not?

They pursued their happiness when they chose to open the business under the existing laws of the United States... if that business will not make them happy then do something else. I don't see why this is an issue.

 

[Peter King]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

Then do they have the right to pursue their happiness or not?

they are allowed to pursue their happiness but do not destroy the happiness or civil rights/liberties of someone else. Also, sometimes people who work will have to do things that they are not too happy about (I have had certain duties in my work that I did not like to do) and if you own a business you too might have to do things that you are not crazy about. Pursuit of happiness does not depend on sometimes doing something you would rather not do IMHO.

 

[Bodi]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

I disagree with you, normal businesses should never be allowed to ban people from their doors except on very specific, valid and non-discriminatory reasons.

A business should refuse to serve/sell to someone if the person has stolen from them, refuses to pay their bills, is too young to be allowed inside or the service/goods are not appropriate or allowed for anyone under the age of 18 or 21, or if they are drunk/stoned/unsanitary/violate decent dress code in such a manner that it is illegal or extremely improper/etc.

Reasons like that can be absolutely perfectly legal for refusal of service/selling, but refusing someone service because you don't like them, don't like how they look, because they are on parole, they are black, hispanic, white, asian, gay, lesbian, obese, too tall, too obese, have a handicap, etc. etc. should not be allowed.

You should not be able to escape prosecution from discrimination laws by posting "no blacks allowed" or "no gays allowed" or "no muslims/jews allowed".

That at least is my opinion.

I agree. I was just trying to find a compromise between our two opposite views...

 

[Henrin]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

they are allowed to pursue their happiness but do not destroy the happiness or civil rights/liberties of someone else.

So these other people have the right to access property that is not their own, the right to force people to serve them, the right to force the owner of resources to use those resources on them, and the right to force people to associate with them. Apparently they only have these rights if the private property is a public accommodation. The right to violate other peoples rights is always interesting, but then, positive rights always are.

Then again, you believe the government should seriously impair the peoples right to self defense, so...

 

[Peter King]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

So these other people have the right to access property that is not their own, the right to force people to serve them, the right to force the owner of resources to use those resources on them, and the right to force people to associate with them. Apparently they only have these rights if the private property is a public accommodation. The right to violate other peoples rights is always interesting, but then, positive rights always are.

Then again, you believe the government should seriously impair the peoples right to self defense, so...

Do you want the right to discriminate by determining as to who you allow on your property, if you want to deny service to people, do not want to use your resources on people you do not want to have on your property and do not want to be associated with people against your will? Yes?

Then don't start a company/baker/restaurant/supermarket/letting office/etc.etc.etc

Any company who starts up should inform them on their rights and duties (among them the public accommodation thing), any company who find out afterwards then you did not do your job properly and that is your problem. Are there duties/laws you must abide by when you start a company but you don't really want to?

Then don't start a company/baker/restaurant/supermarket/letting office/etc.etc.etc

 

[Peter King]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

I agree. I was just trying to find a compromise between our two opposite views...

Sometimes there are things for which no compromise is realistically possible and when that happens you must follow the law and find in favor of the people who are the victims of discrimination and not the one who think it is their right to discriminate against others because of their faith/points of view.

 

[Bodi]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

Sometimes there are things for which no compromise is realistically possible and when that happens you must follow the law and find in favor of the people who are the victims of discrimination and not the one who think it is their right to discriminate against others because of their faith/points of view.

Again... I agree.

 

[Henrin]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

Do you want the right to discriminate by determining as to who you allow on your property, if you want to deny service to people, do not want to use your resources on people you do not want to have on your property and do not want to be associated with people against your will? Yes?

Then don't start a company/baker/restaurant/supermarket/letting office/etc.etc.etc

One of my rights as a property owner is use my property in the way I see fit and that includes opening up any kind of business I want. Telling me I must avoid opening up a certain kind of business because my rights will be violated if I do is hardly an argument I would be proud of making if I was you.

Everything you said here does not deal with any of my arguments. The law is still violation of property rights, is still violation of the right to association, and still forces people into service for others.

 

[Henrin]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

Sometimes there are things for which no compromise is realistically possible and when that happens you must follow the law and find in favor of the people who are the victims of discrimination and not the one who think it is their right to discriminate against others because of their faith/points of view.

You mean the people that don't have the right to enter or use the property, don't have the right to force people to associate with them, don't have the right to someone else's labor, and don't have the right to make people use resources towards them. Yes, lets find in the favor of the people that don't have any rights in question and find against the people that are having their rights violated. Makes perfect sense.

 

[Henrin]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

they are allowed to pursue their happiness but do not destroy the happiness or civil rights/liberties of someone else.

To pursue their happiness they must have control over their property and their lives.

 

[Henrin]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

Business owners aren't slaves, but they do serve.

I never said they were slaves. Why don't you look up the terms slavery and involuntary servitude or just look back in the thread to find the definitions of the terms.

 

[Peter King]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

One of my rights as a property owner is use my property in the way I see fit and that includes opening up any kind of business I want. Telling me I must avoid opening up a certain kind of business because my rights will be violated if I do is hardly an argument I would be proud of making if I was you.

No, you have the rights as a property owner to use your property in the way you see fit (including starting a business) but only as long you as you comply with the laws of the United States.

And I am not telling you you must avoid opening a business, I am saying that people who open a business have to accept that there are rules and regulations and if they do not like those rules and regulations they have 3 realistic options:

1. close their business all together
2. comply with the law
3. never start a business to begin with because you know what you are getting yourself into and that you have to comply with these laws and rules.

Everything you said here does not deal with any of my arguments. The law is still violation of property rights, is still violation of the right to association, and still forces people into service for others.

Because your arguments are contradictory with the standing law in the US.

If you open up a business you know full well that this means you have to comply with certain rules and regulations that might limit your rights as a property owner. The right for a property owner to do with his property whatever he wants is nonsense. There are zoning laws, building laws and planning laws that already limit the things you can do with your property.

And if you want to start a business you will find even more rules and regulations that the building has to comply with and then we are not even talking about the business rules and regulations you have to follow if you have opened a business.

Your arguments are a non-starter because every business owner should know or knows what he is getting himself into and if he does not know that he has done shoddy preparatory work or he is a bit dim

 

[Peter King]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

You mean the people that don't have the right to enter or use the property, don't have the right to force people to associate with them, don't have the right to someone else's labor, and don't have the right to make people use resources towards them. Yes, lets find in the favor of the people that don't have any rights in question and find against the people that are having their rights violated. Makes perfect sense.

It makes no sense if we would be talking about regular homeowners, but we are not, we are talking about business owners and they have to comply with the law and that makes perfect sense.

 

[Peter King]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

To pursue their happiness they must have control over their property and their lives.

They do, as long as it conforms with the laws of the United States.

 

[Henrin]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

No, you have the rights as a property owner to use your property in the way you see fit (including starting a business) but only as long you as you comply with the laws of the United States.

Sorry, but my right to property does not come from the state and they do not make the rules on what my rights detail. They simply violate my rights when they pass laws that restrict my practice of my rights.

And I am not telling you you must avoid opening a business, I am saying that people who open a business have to accept that there are rules and regulations and if they do not like those rules and regulations they have 3 realistic options:

1. close their business all together
2. comply with the law
3. never start a business to begin with because you know what you are getting yourself into and that you have to comply with these laws and rules.

I see...

1. Then I must no longer pursue my happiness.
2. Then I must be involuntary servant.
3. Then I can not practice my property rights.

Because your arguments are contradictory with the standing law in the US.

If you open up a business you know full well that this means you have to comply with certain rules and regulations that might limit your rights as a property owner. The right for a property owner to do with his property whatever he wants is nonsense. There are zoning laws, building laws and planning laws that already limit the things you can do with your property.

Yes, and I never agreed to any of those. Do you think I should have to get a permit to build a deck or put a garden in the backyard? Well? It's one thing to say that when I build a dam and it floods my neighbors yard that I will held responsible for any damages, but if my dam simply floods my own yard why is it the states concern if I build it or not? Why do they get to tell me what I can and can't do with my property before anything happens? Well?

Your arguments are a non-starter because every business owner should know or knows what he is getting himself into and if he does not know that he has done shoddy preparatory work or he is a bit dim

Did I agree to any of the laws you mentioned above when I bought my home? No. So why is this different?

 

[Henrin]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

They do, as long as it conforms with the laws of the United States.

How do you figure that? I don't see how you can force people to do your bidding and then sit there and claim they are in charge of their property and lives.

 

[Henrin]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

It makes no sense if we would be talking about regular homeowners, but we are not, we are talking about business owners and they have to comply with the law and that makes perfect sense.

It makes no sense no matter what the purpose of the private property is.

 

[Peter King]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

It makes no sense no matter what the purpose of the private property is.

So because it is a private property you can open a brothel and the government will just have to accept it?

Or you open an restaurant with Arab food and you put in the windows "no Jews allowed"?

Or you open a Jewish bakery and refuse to sell your food to anyone who is Arab?

Or you open a bed and breakfast and put in the window "whites only"?

You open a sex shop next door to a kindergarten school and when the city says you are not allowed, what are you going to tell them? Suck it! My property and I can do what I want with it?

I am sorry but if you have a business you cannot do that. If you are a private person and you want to have an SM room in your house fine, if you want to refuse blacks entrance to your private house that is morally not fine but not illegal as it is your private property and you are not in any way held to specific laws. But as a business you have to comply to rules, sorry but that is just how it is.

Private property does not mean that you are totally free to do whatever you want, that depends on the situation and the circumstances (like with a business for example).

 

[Peter King]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

Sorry, but my right to property does not come from the state and they do not make the rules on what my rights detail. They simply violate my rights when they pass laws that restrict my practice of my rights.

Actually, that is exactly what the law does within limits (and those limits are set out in the constitution). And if you are of the opinion that laws violate your rights you have the right to address that issue with the courts, but as long as they have not ruled on it or ruled that the laws are legal, they are the law and do not violate your rights.

I see...

1. Then I must no longer pursue my happiness.

Well, that is your choice to no longer pursue your happiness but as long as having a business is your wish you have to do that within the confines of the law. And if you do not want to do that you are the one who chooses to no longer pursue your happiness.

2. Then I must be involuntary servant.

Sorry, the supreme court already ruled that being forced to follow the law is not involuntary servant. You either do your job or stop with your job.

3. Then I can not practice my property rights.

What property rights? If they are not yours to enforce they were never your property rights to begin with, at least not after you decided to open a business.

Yes, and I never agreed to any of those. Do you think I should have to get a permit to build a deck or put a garden in the backyard? Well? It's one thing to say that when I build a dam and it floods my neighbors yard that I will held responsible for any damages, but if my dam simply floods my own yard why is it the states concern if I build it or not? Why do they get to tell me what I can and can't do with my property before anything happens? Well?

I am sorry, but there are millions of people who never agreed with other laws but are still held to them. That is what happens in a community. If you do not want to be held to rules and regulations you did not agree to you should buy your own island and start your own country with the laws you agreed with, build a space ship go to an uninhabited planet and do the same.

Communities come with laws, societies come with regulations, living an a country forces you to accept the laws of that land (or try to change them through democratic or judicial means). That is how it has been for centuries and that is how it works.

Did I agree to any of the laws you mentioned above when I bought my home? No. So why is this different?

No, but when you bought your home and it was not a business you did not have to comply with these laws. But as soon as you start up that business you know it comes with rules and regulations.

 

[Henrin]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

So because it is a private property you can open a brothel and the government will just have to accept it?

Lol, what is with you guys and brothels? I dealt with this exact same argument last week on this very same topic from a different poster.

Who am I harming by opening a brothel? If everyone that I do business with and all ladies I hire are there on their own free will I'm not harming anyone.

Or you open an restaurant with Arab food and you put in the windows "no Jews allowed"?

I don't see why not.

Or you open a Jewish bakery and refuse to sell your food to anyone who is Arab?

I don't see why not.

Or you open a bed and breakfast and put in the window "whites only"?

Again, I don't see why not.

You open a sex shop next door to a kindergarten school and when the city says you are not allowed, what are you going to tell them? Suck it! My property and I can do what I want with it?

Indeed.

Private property does not mean that you are totally free to do whatever you want, that depends on the situation and the circumstances (like with a business for example).

Sure it does. In none of the examples you have listed the use of the property violated the rights of someone else and therefore the state has no reason to act if I do.

 

[TiredOfLife]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

Lol, what is with you guys and brothels? I dealt with this exact same argument last week on this very same topic from a different poster.

Why a brothel? Capitalism baby. Sex sells.

 

[Henrin]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

Why a brothel? Capitalism baby. Sex sells.

Yeah, but still, it's a bit telling that whenever I talk of this topic I get asked about brothels first thing. :lol:

 

[TiredOfLife]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

Yeah, but still, it's a bit telling that whenever I talk of this topic I get asked about brothels first thing. :lol:

What it should tell you that where capitalism and morality meet up is where men pay for sex.

 

[Henrin]

Re: TODD'S AMERICAN DISPATCH: Christian bakery closes after LGBT threats, protests[W:

What it should tell you that where capitalism and morality meet up is where men pay for sex.

The ladies are selling and the men are buying. Same as it always was.