Crosswords0 min ago
Religion No Excuse For Gay Discrimination
316 Answers
In a similar case to Cakegate, a court in the US has ruled that discrimination against gays on religious grounds isn't lawful:
https:/
https:/
Answers
A, I am not ranting. B, I have the balls to call out homophobic bigots what ever their religion ... try it for once.
09:18 Fri 17th Feb 2017
Le me try to break that down, v_e.
> //Islay.... are you, like me, surprised that there are some people on here that give tacit support to bigots ?
OK, first part. Is the florist a bigot? Bigotry is defined as "intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself". So, arguably, yes, she is a bigot. She has been intolerant towards the gay couple, in refusing to serve them when that is the very thing she is in business to do. Whether she is standing by her principles or not is moot if her principles are themselves bigoted.
The second part - are some people giving tacit support to bigots, i.e. the florist? Unquestionably, some people are supporting the florist, which is why the thread is still ongoing.
The third part - "are you, like me, surprised?" - is straying into dangerous ground. I don't think Mikey could really claim to be surprised by any of the responses on this thread. I don't know what he was trying to do here.
Now the response.
> Mikey I think people are just exposing themselves as bigots!
In my mind if you are in business you can not pick and choose who you serve it does not matter what line of business you are in.
Let's break that down.
> Mikey I think people are just exposing themselves as bigots!
I think that's a highly contentious statement. I would not take it that far.
> In my mind if you are in business you can not pick and choose who you serve it does not matter what line of business you are in.
To a point, you can pick and choose who you do business with, so this statement is wrong. What you can't do is pick and choose based on illegal prejudice, which I think is what was meant.
> //Islay.... are you, like me, surprised that there are some people on here that give tacit support to bigots ?
OK, first part. Is the florist a bigot? Bigotry is defined as "intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself". So, arguably, yes, she is a bigot. She has been intolerant towards the gay couple, in refusing to serve them when that is the very thing she is in business to do. Whether she is standing by her principles or not is moot if her principles are themselves bigoted.
The second part - are some people giving tacit support to bigots, i.e. the florist? Unquestionably, some people are supporting the florist, which is why the thread is still ongoing.
The third part - "are you, like me, surprised?" - is straying into dangerous ground. I don't think Mikey could really claim to be surprised by any of the responses on this thread. I don't know what he was trying to do here.
Now the response.
> Mikey I think people are just exposing themselves as bigots!
In my mind if you are in business you can not pick and choose who you serve it does not matter what line of business you are in.
Let's break that down.
> Mikey I think people are just exposing themselves as bigots!
I think that's a highly contentious statement. I would not take it that far.
> In my mind if you are in business you can not pick and choose who you serve it does not matter what line of business you are in.
To a point, you can pick and choose who you do business with, so this statement is wrong. What you can't do is pick and choose based on illegal prejudice, which I think is what was meant.
douglas - //"... you get accused and convicted because you break the law, and I see nothing whatsoever that is honourable about that."
Not even in Alabama, on a bus? //
If you are seriously trying to draw a parallel between Rosa Parkes' actions in 1963, when she was protesting against national ingrained prejudice, and this woman florist who is actually practising her own personal ingrained prejudice, you'll excuse me if I laugh out loud.
Not even in Alabama, on a bus? //
If you are seriously trying to draw a parallel between Rosa Parkes' actions in 1963, when she was protesting against national ingrained prejudice, and this woman florist who is actually practising her own personal ingrained prejudice, you'll excuse me if I laugh out loud.
The analogy with Muslims not serving alcohol or pork doesn't work for me. That would be akin to the lady not serving roses because her religion doesn't let her touch them. No discrimination as I see it. In this case she is making the judgement on who she will serve not what she will serve.
'He who judges will be judged' - she should recognise that and accept that she has been judged!
'He who judges will be judged' - she should recognise that and accept that she has been judged!
Naomi - //I am of the opinion that one or two of us – or maybe three or four – are talking about something that is clearly eluding others. I’ll return again when those people have caught up – if they ever do.... //
I am probably not a member of your clique who grasp something that is eluding 'others'.
If by 'catching up, you mean seeing the situation as you do, then I am delighted not to be 'catching up'.
Why do you always have to see people who don't agree with you as somehow missing something only you, and your select coterie, can see?
I am probably not a member of your clique who grasp something that is eluding 'others'.
If by 'catching up, you mean seeing the situation as you do, then I am delighted not to be 'catching up'.
Why do you always have to see people who don't agree with you as somehow missing something only you, and your select coterie, can see?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.