Whats next??????????

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

The point of the 1st amendment is to allow individual citizens to exercise their faith and conscience without the burden to prove that it is reasonable or right.



The point of the 13th amendment is an absolute ban on involuntary servitude within the US.



I notice you avoided the question about how forcing citizens to violate their faith and conscience in performing labor in support of homosexual weddings is not involuntary servitude.



The arguments I have heard focus on whether the forced servitude is justified or reasonable, since it is clearly involuntary.

I didn't ignore the question, I just didn't read your whole post and still haven't.

[Goooh]

BTW, I'm indifferent

[mcjaredsandwich]

Can't get the video to embed, but MathGeek, Duckman1911 and whoever else...please watch and listen fully to this argument.

https://youtu.be/A8JsRx2lois

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by mcjaredsandwich

Can't get the video to embed, but MathGeek, Duckman1911 and whoever else...please watch and listen fully to this argument.

https://youtu.be/A8JsRx2lois

It is not so much an argument as an attempt at an analogy.

The flaws in the "right side of history" claims have been thoroughly debunked.

http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/bl...tory-argument/

Further, the bigger concern of most people of faith is not what homosexuals are given the liberty to do, but in the forced violations of conscience upon people of faith who object to personal participation based on their faith and conscience.

Let the Sodomites continue to be Sodomites. But it is great evil to force people of faith to participate with them.

[duckman1911]

Originally Posted by mcjaredsandwich

Can't get the video to embed, but MathGeek, Duckman1911 and whoever else...please watch and listen fully to this argument.

https://youtu.be/A8JsRx2lois

It's not a religious issue for me. I am not the judge. I will be judged just like everyone else. My issue is that a business owner should be free to not serve someone based on any reason they see fit. Gay, straight, white, black or not tall enough or you're too tall. The person that owns a business should be free to decided based on any reason. Granted that freedom is also a two way street. A person can go tell everyone they know don't go to ducks shop and spend money because he is an Ahole.
I'm not an Ahole just using that as an analogy. I should have as much right to deny service as people have to tell others not to spend money with me. As a business owner it's not a wise decision but it should still be your decision to make.

[duckman1911]

The one thing I find funny about libertarians is they don't want anyone being discrimitated against but at the same time that is discriminating against those that want to discriminate against others. Catch 22

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

It is not so much an argument as an attempt at an analogy.



The flaws in the "right side of history" claims have been thoroughly debunked.



http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/bl...tory-argument/



Further, the bigger concern of most people of faith is not what homosexuals are given the liberty to do, but in the forced violations of conscience upon people of faith who object to personal participation based on their faith and conscience.



Let the Sodomites continue to be Sodomites. But it is great evil to force people of faith to participate with them.

Give 3 examples please.

[Reggoh]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

The point of the 1st amendment is to allow individual citizens to exercise their faith and conscience without the burden to prove that it is reasonable or right.

The point of the 13th amendment is an absolute ban on involuntary servitude within the US.

I notice you avoided the question about how forcing citizens to violate their faith and conscience in performing labor in support of homosexual weddings is not involuntary servitude.

The arguments I have heard focus on whether the forced servitude is justified or reasonable, since it is clearly involuntary.

MG I am against same sex marriage based on my religious beliefs.

I think you are misinterpreting the meaning of "involuntary servitude".

Business owners have a right to serve the public and it IS voluntary... they have chosen to open a public business. This business is privately owned but it is in service to the general public.

Under our government, they do not have a right to refuse that public service based on religion, race, or sexual orientation.

If I decide to sell you a boat and you show up to my house and you are hispanic... I can tell you to get the hell out and I'm not selling my boat... I thought you said your name was JOHN.... not JAUN.

If I open a business to sell boats and you show up to buy one I can't refuse to sell it to you based on your race. I would be breaking the law.

The whole WALMART cake thing with the confederate flag is a tough one... If they told the person "I am not baking it because it's a racist symbol" then I believe they are breaking the law because they have brought race into it.
If they just simply refused to bake it, the burden of proof would be on the person to prove it was racially related.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Reggoh

Under our government, they do not have a right to refuse that public service based on religion, race, or sexual orientation.

Please cite the statute under Louisiana or Federal law that prevents refusal of service based on sexual orientation.

Please cite the law or the legal argument giving the US Congress or the LA legislature power to pass laws contrary to the 1st and 13th amendments.

[capt coonassty]

Originally Posted by duckman1911

The one thing I find funny about libertarians is they don't want anyone being discrimitated against but at the same time that is discriminating against those that want to discriminate against others. Catch 22

So you would be fine is someone would refuse you service because your are christian, male, or presumably white?

[duckman1911]

Originally Posted by capt coonassty

So you would be fine is someone would refuse you service because your are christian, male, or presumably white?

As a matter of fact yes. I would actually prefer it. Why would I want to give my hard earned money to someone that doesn't like me when I can go just down the road and spend my money with someone who does like me? It's a fairly simple concept.

[duckman1911]

Originally Posted by capt coonassty

So you would be fine is someone would refuse you service because your are christian, male, or presumably white?

From your name I'm wondering if you are a guide. Not trying be a doushe just wondering if you would be happy being forced to take someone on your boat that you disliked?

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by capt coonassty

So you would be fine is someone would refuse you service because your are christian, male, or presumably white?

Many businesses make a habit of refusing service to honest citizens exercising their 2nd amendment rights. They even put a sign out front announcing it.

My family has been refused service and discriminated against for any number of reasons. Sometimes I make efforts to determine the reasons, most of the time I just take my Benjamins somewhere else.

One place where I buy bait has a sign above the door saying "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." I appreciate that and while it would be disappointing if they began discriminating againt black drum fishermen, I would respect their decision.

[seachaser250]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Many businesses make a habit of refusing service to honest citizens exercising their 2nd amendment rights. They even put a sign out front announcing it.

My family has been refused service and discriminated against for any number of reasons. Sometimes I make efforts to determine the reasons, most of the time I just take my Benjamins somewhere else.

One place where I buy bait has a sign above the door saying "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." I appreciate that and while it would be disappointing if they began discriminating againt black drum fishermen, I would respect their decision.

Just curious but I'd love to hear a story about one of those times you were refused service.

[capt coonassty]

I am not a guide nor in a business that would ever put myself in the situation to have to refuse anyone service. I understand and agree with your right to do so. I'm just making sure everyone is on the same playing field as far as refusal.

I'm just trying to imagine a situation where someone were to refuse service to Christians (protected class just like sexual orientation) and things go well for that person. Playing devils advocate.

[MathGeek]

http://townhall.com/columnists/johnh...2331/page/full

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by capt coonassty

I'm just trying to imagine a situation where someone were to refuse service to Christians (protected class just like sexual orientation) and things go well for that person. Playing devils advocate.

Please cite the LA or US law stating that businesses cannot refuse service based on sexual orientation.

A Jewish, Atheist, or Muslim printer can absolutely refuse to print a Christian Bible or other Christian materials they find objectionable.

[Reggoh]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Please cite the statute under Louisiana or Federal law that prevents refusal of service based on sexual orientation.

Please cite the law or the legal argument giving the US Congress or the LA legislature power to pass laws contrary to the 1st and 13th amendments.

MG I couldn't find "sexual orientation" in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964... only race, color, religion, national origin, or sex.

I was wrong... I guess business owners can tell the fags to go take a hike.

I did get this off of the National EEOC Website:
In addition, lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals may bring sex discrimination claims.
These may include, for example, allegations of sexual harassment or other kinds of sex discrimination,
such as adverse actions taken because of the person's non-conformance with sex-stereotypes.

My guess is they are fighting to be included in EEOC the same way the Age Discrimination act was added in 1967 and the Americans with Disabilities Act was added to the list in 1990.

As far as your question about a legal argument that says congress can pass laws contrary to the 1st and 13th amendments.. seriously?

You've never heard of the Constitution??
It is a document written a really long time ago that outlines our 3 branches of government and how they can make and change laws.
Congress can introduce a bill that eliminates the 1st and 13th amendments if they want to... If it passes both houses, it can be signed into law by the president.

[mriguy]

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by seachaser250

Just curious but I'd love to hear a story about one of those times you were refused service.

Every time we see a sign saying no guns allowed, we've been denied service for exercising our 2nd amendment rights.