Tweet
I applaud wufan for continuing to try to further difficult discussions, and for that matter jdshock as well. But so much of this seems to lack any common sense......people feeling "hurt" over speech, that clearly isn't harmful at least in any way known to man since the dawn of time, and then those hurt people needing to be made whole by throwing dollars at them or punishing others is just really hard to understand. Live your life, love your neighbor, and ignore stupidity.
-
-
The reason I continue the discussions is because there is a percentage of the population that believes the best remedy is to quiet those that might cause discomfort in the pursuit of truth. These are not bad people, but these ideas are far more dangerous than the ideas from which they wish to protect others. As long as the debate continues, we all win.Originally posted by WuDrWu View PostLivin the dreamComment
-
So, how does everyone feel about this. The Owner of the Red Hen Explains Why She Asked Sarah Huckabee Sanders to Leave.
Of interest to this discussion: Wilkinson, the owner, huddled with her workers, several who were gay. "Tell me what you want me to do. I can ask her to leave," Wilkinson told the staff, she said. "They said yes."Comment
-
Totally legal. Bad idea.Livin the dreamComment
-
How can one be outraged over the baker and not be equally or more outraged over this? But I do agree, legal but a bad idea.Go Shocks!Comment
-
The easy answer is that in many states you can legally discriminate based on political beliefs.Originally posted by ShockerDropOut View Post
In what world should I be MORE outraged about this?Comment
-
Can you further explain what you're saying here please? In many states? What does that mean? Some states have passed laws like that? Are you saying you're ok with states having more rights to pass laws like this based on what those people think is best? Honestly, I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to find out if that's really the case. And also how you feel about it. -
WuDrWu, I'm not sure there's any state that has outlawed discrimination like this. Some states have said you can't get fired for your political beliefs. I'm just covering my bases because it's possible there's a state that did make something like this illegal, just none that I know of.
I definitely think you should be allowed to refuse service to someone for their political beliefs. Admittedly, things get wonky fast because how do you draw the line between a "political" belief and a "religious" belief?
-
-
KKK members from the south of 75-100 years ago would be so proud today of what the far left has become. Definitely confused and conflicted, but proud at the evolution of their basic tactics.
An objective person could be irked at what the far right has turned into, but legitimately terrified at the culture that has developed on the far left. A million-headed Che Guevara in training. Is the US going to look more like Cuba by the end of this century? Certainly not out of the question.Comment
-
Perhaps because she didn’t ask someone to violate their beliefs, and then sue them?Originally posted by jdshock View PostLivin the dreamComment
-
So, it is OK to ask someone to leave, even if they are paying (or offering to) customers.
If Sanders had asked to use the restroom, could they say no?"When life hands you lemons, make lemonade." Better have some sugar and water too, or else your lemonade will suck!Comment
-
For the record, I'm not outraged one way or the other about the Colorado incident. I hope we can all agree that what the baker did in Colorado was illegal according to (democratically passed) law. Because it was illegal according to Colorado law, we need to have the court system tell us if Colorado law needs to have exceptions or be struck down or whatever.Originally posted by wufan View Post
Personally, I don't believe the baker was asked to violate his beliefs. But I'm willing to recognize the supreme court needs to make a decision on this issue. If you support the baker, don't be outraged about the lawsuit. It had to happen eventually. What he did was objectively against Colorado law.
As for SHS, if I owned a restaurant, I probably would've served her. But who cares? Does anyone here really want it to be unlawful? Whether you do or do not want the baker stuff to be unlawful, the fact of the matter is that it was unlawful. It is up to congress to pass laws the majority want and the courts to test those laws. By all accounts, that is what is happening in the Colorado case. And I wouldn't worry too much about the baker. His insistence that he denied service because they were gay is the only reason the case has gotten to this stage. Personally, I'm glad he is willing to test the law in this way.Last edited by jdshock; June 24, 2018, 06:09 AM.Comment
-
Again, lets not mix words. He says he serves gay people all the time. He just would not do a gay wedding cake. So it wasn't because they were gay. It was the message is what the reason the baker said he refused service.Originally posted by jdshock View PostComment
-
Absolutely not an important distinction. That's not his argument. His argument is thar he can deny service (even if it's just this one service) because they're homosexual on free speech grounds and religious beliefs
I don't get the point in this correction. He is admitting it's because they're gay. Otherwise there would be no case.
-
-
Just a joke. Don't read anything into it. Just a joke I thought was funny.
Comment
-
I'm not sure it could ever be funny, but it would have been ironic if in fact Sarah had filed a complaint, which of course she didn't. She didn't go out of her way to victimize herself. And I'm so sick of anyone who disagrees with liberals being called a racist. It's beyond old. What happened to both sides essentially wanting the same thing (a better country) and disagreeing on the ways to get there?
-
-
Just to throw a little more onto this, there is a sign (or at least was at the time) in the Red Hen's window next to the door customers go in.
It reads: "Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into a friend". Guess the owner violated her own sign.
By the way, jdshock, I like your posting, even if I may not always agree with you. However, your quoted tweet was not funny. The word "racist" is too easily thrown around.
Comment
-
I just watched the baker on NBC's morning show I think. I just don't get how people can say or even want to say what he is doing is or should be against the law. He clearly states he will sell to anyone and offered to sell to the 2 men. He doesn't do a bunch of messages. He won't make a Halloween cake. He won't make cakes that are anti-American and he wouldn't make a cake disparaging LGBTQ folks. It is unfathomable to me how that should ever be against the law.Comment
-
The owner's pissed, like many, because at this pace Trump is the front-runner to win in 2020. No?
DgP229zWkAEpuWy.jpgComment
Comment