NM Supreme Court Forces Christian to Take Gay Wedding Photos

[Dyakovo]

If you think that your religion gives you the "right" to discriminate, then yes, it is a big fuck you to the person's religion and to the ignorant twat who believes that their religion gives them the right to discriminate.
There isn't and never has been a right to discriminate.

Thank you for being honest

You do not give a shit if someone has to burn in hell per their own beliefs as long as you get your way.

I don't give a shit if a person thinks they're going to burn in hell because hell is an imaginary place.

[Menassa]

I know it is the standard fuck you and your religion, we will decide what is right and wrong and what your religion is.

You do realize that no one has the right to discriminate, right? I mean, you totally can be as bigoted as you like in your personal life, but the United States has already ruled that discrimination as part of business practice is against the law.

Even if a shop owner is loosing costumers because of it (it being the thing they would discriminate against?)

[Allie Youngblood]

If you think that your religion gives you the "right" to discriminate, then yes, it is a big fuck you to the person's religion and to the ignorant twat who believes that their religion gives them the right to discriminate.
There isn't and never has been a right to discriminate.

Thank you for being honest

You do not give a shit if someone has to burn in hell per their own beliefs as long as you get your way.

There is no hell, so we don't give a shit anyways.

[Herrebrugh]

If you think that your religion gives you the "right" to discriminate, then yes, it is a big fuck you to the person's religion and to the ignorant twat who believes that their religion gives them the right to discriminate.
There isn't and never has been a right to discriminate.

Thank you for being honest

You do not give a shit if someone has to burn in hell per their own beliefs as long as you get your way.

I'm sorry if this comes as a shock (not really, but whatever), but the beliefs of one person are not more valuable than those of another. No matter what those beliefs say.

[Dyakovo]

You do realize that no one has the right to discriminate, right? I mean, you totally can be as bigoted as you like in your personal life, but the United States has already ruled that discrimination as part of business practice is against the law.

Even if a shop owner is loosing costumers because of it (it being the thing they would discriminate against?)

Correct.

[Allie Youngblood]

You do realize that no one has the right to discriminate, right? I mean, you totally can be as bigoted as you like in your personal life, but the United States has already ruled that discrimination as part of business practice is against the law.

Even if a shop owner is loosing costumers because of it (it being the thing they would discriminate against?)

Then the customers are assholes, not the shop owner.

[Farnhamia]

Even if a shop owner is loosing costumers because of it (it being the thing they would discriminate against?)

Correct.

That's the Free Market taking care of things, right? With just a little direction from the law.

[Menassa]

Even if a shop owner is loosing costumers because of it (it being the thing they would discriminate against?)

Then the customers are assholes, not the shop owner.

But if they discriminate against said person, they are in violation of the law?

[Allie Youngblood]

Then the customers are assholes, not the shop owner.

But if they discriminate against said person, they are in violation of the law?

If they're discriminating due to one of the big categories (gender, race, age, ability, sexual orientation in this case). then yes, they will be in violation of the law. You're free to tell someone with no shoes on to leave. You can't tell a woman to leave because she's a woman.

[Dyakovo]

Then the customers are assholes, not the shop owner.

But if they discriminate against said person, they are in violation of the law?

A place of business being a public accommodation does not mean that every member of the public is required to patronize them.

[Allie Youngblood]

But if they discriminate against said person, they are in violation of the law?

A place of business being a public accommodation does not mean that every member of the public is required to patronize them.

Also this. It's called "freedom of choice".

[Llamalandia]

Correct.

That's the Free Market taking care of things, right? With just a little direction from the law.

Dang it i was so close to agreeing with you if only you hadn't tacked on that little bit about :

With just a little direction from the law.

So frustratingly close to agreement.

[Mavorpen]

That's the Free Market taking care of things, right? With just a little direction from the law.

Dang it i was so close to agreeing with you if only you hadn't tacked on that little bit about :

With just a little direction from the law.

So frustratingly close to agreement.

It always amuses me that people think markets work in a vacuum.

[HappyShark]

Thank you for being honest

You do not give a shit if someone has to burn in hell per their own beliefs as long as you get your way.

I'm sorry if this comes as a shock (not really, but whatever), but the beliefs of one person are not more valuable than those of another. No matter what those beliefs say.

Please read the response of your fellow compatriots, because if your beliefs were to suddenly conflict with theirs you are fucked my friend.

[Dyakovo]

I'm sorry if this comes as a shock (not really, but whatever), but the beliefs of one person are not more valuable than those of another. No matter what those beliefs say.

Please read the response of your fellow compatriots, because if your beliefs were to suddenly conflict with theirs you are fucked my friend.

Only if he tries to use his beliefs to discriminate.

[Allie Youngblood]

I'm sorry if this comes as a shock (not really, but whatever), but the beliefs of one person are not more valuable than those of another. No matter what those beliefs say.

Please read the response of your fellow compatriots, because if your beliefs were to suddenly conflict with theirs you are fucked my friend.

It's only because you're trying to justify discrimination as a business policy. Otherwise, you know, I don't really care.

(Well, okay, I'd care if you're also exploiting sick people with SCAM products, but that's a different story.)

[HappyShark]

Thank you for being honest

You do not give a shit if someone has to burn in hell per their own beliefs as long as you get your way.

I don't give a shit if a person thinks they're going to burn in hell because hell is an imaginary place.

Your beliefs are irrelevant per your own rules.

[Dyakovo]

I don't give a shit if a person thinks they're going to burn in hell because hell is an imaginary place.

Your beliefs are irrelevant per your own rules.

You have serious reading comprehension issues, don't you?

[Allie Youngblood]

I don't give a shit if a person thinks they're going to burn in hell because hell is an imaginary place.

Your beliefs are irrelevant per your own rules.

We didn't say they're not relevant. We said we didn't give a shit because your opinion is wrong.

You tried to guilt trip people who don't believe in hell to feel sorry because you can't discriminate. It didn't work.

I should also make clear. The problem isn't that we think that people have equal rights to be accommodated by a business. The real problem is your belief that your shitty interpretation of your religion triumphs over other people's rights.

[Gauthier]

153 pages of doofs arguing that religion has a special privilege of ignoring established laws against discrimination?

Wow. Just... wow.

[Allie Youngblood]

153 pages of doofs arguing that religion has a special privilege of ignoring established laws against discrimination?

Wow. Just... wow.

You're surprised that they're trying to establish special privileges for their own personal beliefs and codify them as law? This happens all the damn time. Just look at how legislatures established special treatment for SCAMs because they wanted a lower standard.

[HappyShark]

Please read the response of your fellow compatriots, because if your beliefs were to suddenly conflict with theirs you are fucked my friend.

It's only because you're trying to justify discrimination as a business policy. Otherwise, you know, I don't really care.

(Well, okay, I'd care if you're also exploiting sick people with SCAM products, but that's a different story.)

no i am actually pointing out that there is a moral dilemma which even the New Mexico judge recognized

Justice Richard Bosson's "The Huguenins now are compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives. Though the rule of law requires it, the result is sobering. It will no doubt leave a tangible mark on the Huguenins and others of similar views."

Some of you may be celebrating this, but there are some serious ramification behind what occurred here, which apply to much more that just anti-discrimination.

[Dyakovo]

It's only because you're trying to justify discrimination as a business policy. Otherwise, you know, I don't really care.

(Well, okay, I'd care if you're also exploiting sick people with SCAM products, but that's a different story.)

no i am actually pointing out that there is a moral dilemma which even the New Mexico judge recognized

Justice Richard Bosson's "The Huguenins now are compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives. Though the rule of law requires it, the result is sobering. It will no doubt leave a tangible mark on the Huguenins and others of similar views."

Some of you may be celebrating this, but there are some serious ramification behind what occurred here, which apply to much more that just anti-discrimination.

Oh no! The Huguenins will have to accept the fact that they don't have a right to discriminate!!!1!!! How horrible!!!1!!11

[Allie Youngblood]

It's only because you're trying to justify discrimination as a business policy. Otherwise, you know, I don't really care.

(Well, okay, I'd care if you're also exploiting sick people with SCAM products, but that's a different story.)

no i am actually pointing out that there is a moral dilemma which even the New Mexico judge recognized

Justice Richard Bosson's "The Huguenins now are compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives. Though the rule of law requires it, the result is sobering. It will no doubt leave a tangible mark on the Huguenins and others of similar views."

Some of you may be celebrating this, but there are some serious ramification behind what occurred here, which apply to much more that just anti-discrimination.

What ramification? That your religious beliefs do not give you special privilege to hate on other people?

I mean, it was only, what, 150 years (give or take a few) since we abolished slavery? I mean, seriously, slavery is in the damn Bible, and yet you're not fighting for the right to own slaves, are you?

[HappyShark]

Your beliefs are irrelevant per your own rules.

We didn't say they're not relevant. We said we didn't give a shit because your opinion is wrong.

You tried to guilt trip people who don't believe in hell to feel sorry because you can't discriminate. It didn't work.

I should also make clear. The problem isn't that we think that people have equal rights to be accommodated by a business. The real problem is your belief that your shitty interpretation of your religion triumphs over other people's rights.

lol i have no religion, I am arguing from a purely pragmatic point of view of what rights have actually been taken away from all of us. In as much as the courts have ruled your personal beliefs, ethics, and morals mean diddly squat.

i am now just waiting for the day some Gay person gets fucked over for their own beliefs morals or ethics, so that they understand what is being spoken about here.