Ministers threatened with arrest

[Galloism]

But if they pay for a Christian wedding, they have to provide it. Period.

They can't provide a Christian wedding for a gay couple, because Christianity does not have gay weddings. That's like asking the chapel to provide people with reincarnation, it's not part of Christian doctrine.

I'd like to see anyone provide reincarnation.

[The Floating Island of the Sleeping God]

But if they pay for a Christian wedding, they have to provide it. Period.

They can't provide a Christian wedding for a gay couple, because Christianity does not have gay weddings. That's like asking the chapel to provide people with reincarnation, it's not part of Christian doctrine.

Welp, you just gave me the fantastic mental image of someone angrily demanding a priest to sell them a reincarnation.

[The Flood]

businesses, because they are run by individuals and for individual profits (and because they represent individual investments), should be allowed to choose their customers.
its in line with property rights and freedom. Everyone should have the right to control his own time, property, investment, and labor.
The state shouldn't go around order people to perform forced labor with the threat of fines and jail times. It's not cool.
As I've said, people have the right to factor in non-economic considerations for their business and some of these could be religious. Every business is an extension of the individual dreams, personalities, aspirations, and ideals of their respective owners. The law needs to make room for that and create a truly free and expressive society.

Good. Now get out of my hotel. Everyone who wants to spend a night in my hotel needs to wear a suit. At all times.

I don't see an issue with a hotel choosing to be a black tie affair (black tie affairs are common, by the way). It's not discrimination to require people to wear a suit.

I don't see such a hotel being very successful though...

[Galloism]

They can't provide a Christian wedding for a gay couple, because Christianity does not have gay weddings. That's like asking the chapel to provide people with reincarnation, it's not part of Christian doctrine.

Welp, you just gave me the fantastic mental image of someone angrily demanding a priest to sell them a reincarnation.

Right?

[Kelinfort]

Good. Now get out of my hotel. Everyone who wants to spend a night in my hotel needs to wear a suit. At all times.

I don't see an issue with a hotel choosing to be a black tie affair (black tie affairs are common, by the way). It's not discrimination to require people to wear a suit.

I don't see such a hotel being very successful though...

The joke was a reference to one of their threads about the conventions of wearing suits to interviews and how onerous that was.

[-Ebola-]

But if they pay for a Christian wedding, they have to provide it. Period.

they never offered to sell it

They did. It's a for-profit business.

If their primary purpose is to practice their religion and not to sell a product or service, then they should reclassify it as a non-profit, in which case the regulations would be different.

[Infected Mushroom]

they never offered to sell it

they offered to provide Christian weddings in accordance with the tenets of their religion, and even a cursory understanding of the beliefs of their denomination tells you that they consider certain forms of weddings appropriately Christian and others not so.

"Their denomination"

Some denominations allow same sex marriage. It's called Christian marriage, correct? And are those denominations not Christian? They never said it was "Southern Baptist Marriage."

Besides, they'd have a much more valid legal argument in that case, if more semantic based.

Well in the OP it said

The wedding chapel is registered as a “religious corporation” limited to performing “one-man-one-woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible.”

The first part might not have any legal force (I don't think there is such a thing as a ''religious corporation'') but the second part, the part where they say they are selling ''one-man-one-woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible'' is a clear statement and representation of what they DO offer to sell.

They can't be asked to sell what they don't offer. They never offered to sell other types of marriage services. They only sold a specific type.

They're not discriminating, they're choosing what services they are selling and what services they are not selling. It doesn't vary with the customer.

A gay person could go to them and ask for a ''one-man-one-woman marriage as defined by the Holy Bible'' and they likely would have obliged. If a straight person had gone to them and asked for a ''non one-man-one-woman marriage as defined by the Holy Bible'' they would have turned it down.

Its about what they've offered to sell. Not who is asking.

You can't go to an intellectual property law firm (that only does intellectual property) and ask for a criminal defense lawyer and upon them being unable or unwilling to produce one, you sue them for discrimination.

The corporation above, in the OP, was incorporated with the sole purpose of providing a particularized form of service. That's what they sell and they are not obligated to sell anything else.

[The Flood]

They can't provide a Christian wedding for a gay couple, because Christianity does not have gay weddings. That's like asking the chapel to provide people with reincarnation, it's not part of Christian doctrine.

Some denominations do, in fact, provide same sex marriage.
So are they not Christian, Scotty?

The denominations are Christian, though heretical. The gay marriages however, are not Christian marriages.

[Mavorpen]

It's a business so it can't illegally discriminate. This is a non-issue.

[Haktiva]

What can I say? The religion of the state trumps the right of discrimination.

If those pastors won't marry you and your partner/butt buddy/whatever the lesbian equivalent of butt-buddy is, then find someone else to marry you!

Better yet, don't get married at all. Do not let the state in on your private life like that. I wonder if this would be an issue if a gay pastor refused to marry a straight couple(I know that's hypothetical, but considering the fact that we're dealing with human beings here, I wouldn't be too surprised)

[Mavorpen]

What can I say? The religion of the state trumps the right of discrimination.

If those pastors won't marry you and your partner/butt buddy/whatever the lesbian equivalent of butt-buddy is, then find someone else to marry you!

Better yet, don't get married at all. Do not let the state in on your private life like that. I wonder if this would be an issue if a gay pastor refused to marry a straight couple(I know that's hypothetical, but considering the fact that we're dealing with human beings here, I wouldn't be too surprised)

Yes, it would still be an issue. As that's still illegal.

Why do people even bother making these silly hypotheticals when the answer is really damn obvious?

[Haktiva]

What can I say? The religion of the state trumps the right of discrimination.

If those pastors won't marry you and your partner/butt buddy/whatever the lesbian equivalent of butt-buddy is, then find someone else to marry you!

Better yet, don't get married at all. Do not let the state in on your private life like that. I wonder if this would be an issue if a gay pastor refused to marry a straight couple(I know that's hypothetical, but considering the fact that we're dealing with human beings here, I wouldn't be too surprised)

Yes, it would still be an issue. As that's still illegal.

Why do people even bother making these silly hypotheticals when the answer is really damn obvious?

my own amusement mostly. people are fucking retarded, so there's really no point in getting butthurt about stuff like this anymore.

[Infected Mushroom]

they never offered to sell it

They did. It's a for-profit business.

If their primary purpose is to practice their religion and not to sell a product or service, then they should reclassify it as a non-profit, in which case the regulations would be different.

they've only offered to sell ''one man one woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible.''

That's what they said they were selling.

You can't go to an Apple store, and sue them when they refuse to sell you Samsung stuff. You go to Samsung for that sort of stuff I would presume.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

It is a business. If they are charging a fee, and filing taxes as a business, then they are a business, regardless of the religious trappings. They could no more discriminate against gay couples than a gay person running that as a business could discriminate against straight couples. If they want to be protected from that, then they need to reorganize themselves as a church rather than a private enterprise.

businesses, because they are run by individuals and for individual profits (and because they represent individual investments), should be allowed to choose their customers.

its in line with property rights and freedom. Everyone should have the right to control his own time, property, investment, and labor.

The state shouldn't go around order people to perform forced labor with the threat of fines and jail times. It's not cool.

As I've said, people have the right to factor in non-economic considerations for their business and some of these could be religious. Every business is an extension of the individual dreams, personalities, aspirations, and ideals of their respective owners. The law needs to make room for that and create a truly free and expressive society.

Fuck that "I not only have the right to be a bigoted asshole, but I have the right to take my bigotry out on people by not serving them." bullshit. Fuck it right in the ear. You want to live like that, you go ahead and invent a time machine to take you back to the early to mid 20th century, where you can see "No Coloreds Allowed" signs posted as far as the eye can see down South. Hell, even up North you knew which places would serve you, and which ones would quietly ignore you until you left in embarrassment. The rest of us? We'll hang out in the 21st century, where you have the right to feel however you want about anyone, but you don't have the right to deny them a public accommodation that you would provide to anyone else for a set fee.

[The Flood]

They did. It's a for-profit business.
If their primary purpose is to practice their religion and not to sell a product or service, then they should reclassify it as a non-profit, in which case the regulations would be different.

they've only offered to sell ''one man one woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible.''
That's what they said they were selling.
You can't go to an Apple store, and sue them when they refuse to sell you Samsung stuff. You go to Samsung for that sort of stuff I would presume.

True, but I still want to sue Apple for selling me a shitty phone

[Mavorpen]

They did. It's a for-profit business.

If their primary purpose is to practice their religion and not to sell a product or service, then they should reclassify it as a non-profit, in which case the regulations would be different.

they've only offered to sell ''one man one woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible.''

That's what they said they were selling.

You can't go to an Apple store, and sue them when they refuse to sell you Samsung stuff. You go to Samsung for that sort of stuff I would presume.

No, you could sue Apple if they offered to sell "Apple products designed only for natural un-fagish heterosexuals." That's an actually legitimate comparison here.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

The specific ministers cannot be forced to perform same-sex marriages in a Christian ceremony, that is true. Here's the thing, though: As a for-profit business, they absolutely have to make allowances for same-sex couples. Whether that involves coming up with a non-Christian ceremony that they're willing to perform, or taking on someone who has no issue with performing the ceremony on an as-needed basis, they don't get to pick and choose the couples they're going to be providing services to as part of a business, at least not based on those particular standards.

A Christian chapel cannot be expected to perform secular weddings, don't be absurd. If you insist on treating marriage as a consumer good, then fine. The product being sold is Christian weddings. They don't offer secular weddings. Therefor a gay couple is asking for something they don't sell. You dig?

I'm not the one treating it as a consumer good. They're the ones running this as a for-profit business.

[Infected Mushroom]

businesses, because they are run by individuals and for individual profits (and because they represent individual investments), should be allowed to choose their customers.

its in line with property rights and freedom. Everyone should have the right to control his own time, property, investment, and labor.

The state shouldn't go around order people to perform forced labor with the threat of fines and jail times. It's not cool.

As I've said, people have the right to factor in non-economic considerations for their business and some of these could be religious. Every business is an extension of the individual dreams, personalities, aspirations, and ideals of their respective owners. The law needs to make room for that and create a truly free and expressive society.

Fuck that "I not only have the right to be a bigoted asshole, but I have the right to take my bigotry out on people by not serving them." bullshit. Fuck it right in the ear. You want to live like that, you go ahead and invent a time machine to take you back to the early to mid 20th century, where you can see "No Coloreds Allowed" signs posted as far as the eye can see down South. Hell, even up North you knew which places would serve you, and which ones would quietly ignore you until you left in embarrassment. The rest of us? We'll hang out in the 21st century, where you have the right to feel however you want about anyone, but you don't have the right to deny them a public accommodation that you would provide to anyone else for a set fee.

have you ever heard of something called freedom of contract and property rights?

why shouldn't someone have complete control over his own labor, investment, time, and property establishment? why shouldn't they have the right in a free society to choose who they want to engage in a mutually beneficial economic transaction with and who they don't want to have that relation with?

why should there be forced labor in a modern economic context? Because that's what this amounts to. You're talking about forcing sellers to perform against their individual will with the threat of state-sanctioned lawsuits, fines, and imprisonment.

[Mavorpen]

A Christian chapel cannot be expected to perform secular weddings, don't be absurd. If you insist on treating marriage as a consumer good, then fine. The product being sold is Christian weddings. They don't offer secular weddings. Therefor a gay couple is asking for something they don't sell. You dig?

I'm not the one treating it as a consumer good. They're the ones running this as a for-profit business.

The simple solution to ANY issue resembling this is to stop being a public accommodation. It's that fucking simple. No one's forcing them to be one. They chose to be one.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

If it were a church, I'd understand their position, but since it's a business, I don't think they're in the right from preventing same sex couples to marry. It's like not wanting to perform interracial marriage. Or not allowing someone to go in due to them being black or Latino.

It's a business and it provides a service. Leave moralizing to church.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

They did. It's a for-profit business.
for-
If their primary purpose is to practice their religion and not to sell a product or service, then they should reclassify it as a non-profit, in which case the regulations would be different.

they've only offered to sell ''one man one woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible.''

That's what they said they were selling.

You can't go to an Apple store, and sue them when they refuse to sell you Samsung stuff. You go to Samsung for that sort of stuff I would presume.

If they want to only perform Christian weddings for Christians, then they need to be a church, not a for-profit business.

[Infected Mushroom]

they've only offered to sell ''one man one woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible.''

That's what they said they were selling.

You can't go to an Apple store, and sue them when they refuse to sell you Samsung stuff. You go to Samsung for that sort of stuff I would presume.

No, you could sue Apple if they offered to sell "Apple products designed only for natural un-fagish heterosexuals." That's an actually legitimate comparison here.

if they wanted to go down that route and only sell that particularly defined type of services, then they should be allowed to.

Whether or not they would lose a ton of revenue from bad press is another issue...

[Mavorpen]

Fuck that "I not only have the right to be a bigoted asshole, but I have the right to take my bigotry out on people by not serving them." bullshit. Fuck it right in the ear. You want to live like that, you go ahead and invent a time machine to take you back to the early to mid 20th century, where you can see "No Coloreds Allowed" signs posted as far as the eye can see down South. Hell, even up North you knew which places would serve you, and which ones would quietly ignore you until you left in embarrassment. The rest of us? We'll hang out in the 21st century, where you have the right to feel however you want about anyone, but you don't have the right to deny them a public accommodation that you would provide to anyone else for a set fee.

have you ever heard of something called freedom of contract and property rights?

why shouldn't someone have complete control over his own labor, investment, time, and property establishment? why shouldn't they have the right in a free society to choose who they want to engage in a mutually beneficial economic transaction with and who they don't want to have that relation with?

why should there be forced labor in a modern economic context? Because that's what this amounts to. You're talking about forcing sellers to perform against their individual will with the threat of state-sanctioned lawsuits, fines, and imprisonment.

Because we're not children. We have rules for entities that want to categorize themselves a certain way. If you make said entity, you have to follow the rules. You don't get to ignore them. That's not how the world works.

[Mavorpen]

if they wanted to go down that route and only sell that particularly defined type of services, then they should be allowed to.

No thanks. We already moved past that as a society after realizing that it's really fucking stupid.

Oh, and they DO have the option to do that. They're entirely allowed to do it. They just have to stop being a public accommodation.

[Infected Mushroom]

they've only offered to sell ''one man one woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible.''

That's what they said they were selling.

You can't go to an Apple store, and sue them when they refuse to sell you Samsung stuff. You go to Samsung for that sort of stuff I would presume.

If they want to only perform Christian weddings for Christians, then they need to be a church, not a for-profit business.

they've defined themselves as a for-profit business that specializes in selling the service of providing ''one man one woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible.'' That's their stated purpose for incorporation and that should be all they are obligated to provide. Anything else is not mandated.

It's the same thing as if a corporation incorporates for the purposes of operating a business that specializes in providing audits for environmental start-ups. That's ALL they set out to do, you can't demand audits for car companies, oil extraction projects, or undersea exploration ventures.

If a corporation incorporates with the announced objective of providing a specialized service (''one man one woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible'') that's all they offered to sell.

In court they could say they turned down the gay couple not because of who they were but because of WHAT they asked. And what they asked for was something they weren't selling and never claimed to sell. Because they've always represented themselves as a seller of ''one man one woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible.'' It's the equivalent of trying to force a soda company to sell you batteries.