Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 defines when a business falls under "public accommodation". A restaurant or hotel by their very nature serves the public.
In most cases that is true. There are exceptions of course. Then there are those businesses, such as mine, that do not accommodate the public. I provide services to very specific clients, of my choosing, not the general public.
Private businesses who DO NOT TAKE TAX MONEY have the right to set their own policies.
A club or a religious organization or a business which does not take tax money and which does not cater to the general public may, (I think) discriminate. A business which is open to the general public is bound by the laws of its state--I think, lol. If you have other info, can you link? Thank you!
Jesus said this when giving the definition of marriage..............."a man shall leave his father and mother and cling to his wife and they shall become one in flesh "
He was speaking in the context of divorce to a group of heterosexuals. His statement does not rule out same-sex marriage.
He was speaking in the context of divorce to a group of heterosexuals. His statement does not rule out same-sex marriage.
Butting in, but yes, he said nothing about same-sex marriage, but said plenty, as you note, about divorce. What is striking is that the same people complaining about same-sex marriage say very little about divorce, which was specifically limited by their savior. A wedding-cake baker whose religious conscience becomes hyperactive when it comes to gay couples most likely will have no objections to a divorced person remarrying, despite the fact that if the divorce happened because of anything but "fornication," the baker is abetting adultery.
Those people are cowardly bigoted hypocrites. Their discrimination has nothing had all to do with their so-called "sacred" religious beliefs:
We wondered what other requests these cakemakers would decline to honor. So last week five WW reporters called these two bakeries anonymously to get price quotes for other occasions frowned upon by some Christians. Surprisingly, the people who answered the phone at each bakery were quite willing to provide baked goods for celebrations of divorces, unmarried parents, stem-cell research, non-kosher barbecues and pagan solstice parties.
We later contacted both bakeries to ask about these inconsistencies. Regentin declined to comment beyond asking whether she had been taped (she had not).
Sweet Cakes owners Melissa and Aaron Klein were upset that we “would even try to entrap a business” and contacted conservative talk-show host Lars Larson.
No state forces anyone to open a business. The state says "here are the rules if you want to open a business". A person CHOOSES to open a business and by choosing to open a business they accept the rules for doing business set forth by the state.
I CHOSE to get a drivers license, by doing so I accepted the rules of driving. If I break those rules I get punished. By choosing to get a business license business owners accept the rules of operating a business, if they break the rules, they get punished. Don't want to follow the rules don't open a business.
No wonder Libertarians want to do away with the requirement to get a license to do anything.
Bills filed in the South Dakota and Kansas legislatures seek to protect clergy, church officials and businesspeople who refuse to provide services for same-sex marriages or receptions because of their religious beliefs.
The bills would prevent clergy or businesses from being forced to perform or supply goods or services to anything related to same-sex marriages. It could allow a business to refuse to host a reception for a same-sex couple legally married in another state.
The bills also say clergy and businesses could not be sued or charged with crimes if they refused to take part in gay marriages.
I'd rather see the states decide than the feds. I'm personally for gay marriage, but don't think others should be forced to do something against their will.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
