should Government tell a Business who to sell to and who they cant?

[Tom]

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Lady Quagga]

Well now.

Sue the business for discriminatory practices? Absolutely.

Sue the owner personally? No way.

But yeah Tom - if I were you, I'd think twice before putting that sign up in your window:

http://www.racismreview.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/no.jpg

[PokerFish]

http://www.christianpost.com/news/christian-florist-can-lose-personal-assets-for-declining-gay-wedding-due-to-relationship-with-jesus-judge-rules-132509/

Is this fair?

Absolutely, it's fair. The business owner should not be personally liable but the business should be forced to comply with anti-discrimination laws.

What if because of my religion, I hate people from a certain country or of other religious faiths or any other number of asinine beliefs.....should I be allowed to discriminate against them because my magic book says so?

[DarkShadow]

Sue the owner personally? No way.

Yeah, you can't sue someone for being a d!ck.

But, you can find this business on Yelp and post a nice review! http://www.yelp.com/biz/arlenes-flowers-richland

[PokerFish]

Sue the business for discriminatory practices? Absolutely.

Sue the owner personally? No way.


I agree. You are free to hold any personal beliefs you want but you are not allowed to discriminate in a place of business because of them.

[pcuser]

I agree. You are free to hold any personal beliefs you want but you are not allowed to discriminate in a place of business because of them.

If she isn't a corporately protected entity, I believe she as the owner is personally responsible. That's what a corporate shield is for...

[pcuser]

http://www.christianpost.com/news/christian-florist-can-lose-personal-assets-for-declining-gay-wedding-due-to-relationship-with-jesus-judge-rules-132509/

Is this fair?

What ever happened to 'turn the other cheek' and 'those without sin cast the first stone'? Also, how are you or anyone else supposed to judge another when Christ supposedly said God is the judge... Consistency is part of the Christian faith, is it not?

[John Harper]

She has a right to her views, and others have the right to disagree with them. When you operate a "public" business, you have no right to allow your "personal beliefs" to intrude and discriminate under the law.

You are also not immune to the consequences of your actions. Boycotts are completely appropriate as a response. If you speak against others, don't cry when you are spoken against.

John

[PokerFish]

If she isn't a corporately protected entity, I believe she as the owner is personally responsible. That's what a corporate shield is for...

I understand the legalities of protection afforded under a business entity (like a LLC) but my comment was more about what's "right." Many small business owners have no personal liability protection since they operate as sole proprietorships or general partnerships for cost or other reasons.

I think the goal of the lawsuit should be to make the business comply with anti-discrimination laws, not ruin the owner financially.

[Tom]

So most of you feel that Government tell you what you who and who you cannot sell to is a Good thing??
How the country has changed. it used to be if you chose not to Sell or Work for someone then it is your loss..the people could go else where
Just wondering how much Government intrusion That you all are comfortable with

So all government laws are right??

[pcuser]

I understand the legalities of protection afforded under a business entity (like a LLC) but my comment was more about what's "right." Many small business owners have no personal liability protection since they operate as sole proprietorships or general partnerships for cost or other reasons.

I think the goal of the lawsuit should be to make the business comply with anti-discrimination laws, not ruin the owner financially.

Normally, I agree we all have freedom of and from religion. However, if you illegally discriminate against the 'public', you should suffer the same penalty you would receive if you knowingly caused injury to another as a business... Also, there are many small towns with a single florist. Should one have to import from the nearest city or another town for a wedding...

[Tom]

Well now.

Sue the business for discriminatory practices? Absolutely.

Sue the owner personally? No way.

But yeah Tom - if I were you, I'd think twice before putting that sign up in your window:

http://www.racismreview.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/no.jpg

Having another bad day are we?

[Tom]

if someone opened up a private fishing lake and said it was for ONLY Men A "Mens fishing club".....is that Discrimination also ??
Should the government get involved??

[John Harper]

I think it's more an issue that most people feel discrimination to be wrong in many ways. Her "belief" system is not a legal nor "rational" reason to discriminate against same sex couples.
Purchasing flowers for a wedding is not inhibiting her right to worship or believe however she chooses. It also does not affect anything but her profit/loss statements.

John

[Lady Quagga]

So most of you feel that Government tell you what you who and who you cannot sell to is a Good thing??
How the country has changed. it used to be if you chose not to Sell or Work for someone then it is your loss..the people could go else where
Just wondering how much Government intrusion That you all are comfortable with

So all government laws are right??

Yes Tom, we all know how nostalgic you get over Jim Crow laws.


if someone opened up a private fishing lake and said it was for ONLY Men A "Mens fishing club".....is that Discrimination also ??
Should the government get involved??

This is a question addressed previously, specifically in regards to private country clubs. Consulting FindLaw.com (http://corporate.findlaw.com/business-operations/anti-discrimination-laws-applicable-to-private-clubs-or-not.html), we find the following factors which may be considered:


- the genuine selectivity of the group in the admission of its members;

- the membership's control over the operations of the establishment;

- the history of the organization;

- the use of the facilities by nonmembers;

- the purpose of the club's existence;

- whether the club advertises for members;

- whether the club is profit or nonprofit; and

- the formalities observed by the club (e.g. bylaws, meetings, membership cards, etc.).

The article goes on to say that the above factors are used to determine if a "club is private in name only, and is really a "place of public accommodation". I think this is a fair method of doing so.


Having another bad day are we?

No, not at all. Why, are you?

[PokerFish]

So most of you feel that Government tell you what you who and who you cannot sell to is a Good thing??
How the country has changed. it used to be if you chose not to Sell or Work for someone then it is your loss..the people could go else where
Just wondering how much Government intrusion That you all are comfortable with

The argument you are making applies equally to discrimination based on race, gender, religious beliefs or any other number of categories.
Do you think I, as a business owner, should be able to discriminate against you because you are Asian or a women or a Catholic or under 5ft tall?
Would it make it any better if I told you my religion makes me hate those particular people?



So all government laws are right??

How is anything anyone has said in this thread any indication that "all government laws are right?"? That is just asinine

[Lady Quagga]

The argument you are making applies equally to discrimination based on race, gender, religious beliefs or any other number of categories.
Do you think I, as a business owner, should be able to discriminate against you because you are Asian or a women or a Catholic or under 5ft tall?
Would it make it any better if I told you my religion makes me hate those particular people?




How is anything anyone has said in this thread any indication that "all government laws are right?"? That is just asinine

Damn you PokerFish, look at what you did!!!!

http://s1.postimg.org/7hd5hwfsv/Untitled.png

[DarkShadow]

if someone opened up a private fishing lake and said it was for ONLY Men A "Mens fishing club".....is that Discrimination also ??
Should the government get involved??

You'd think that before asking this question, one would do a bit of research to inform themselves on what a 'private' and a 'public' entity is, and how discrimination laws affect each.

I'm glad that others below have given you some elucidation.

[PokerFish]

Damn you PokerFish, look at what you did!!!!

http://s1.postimg.org/7hd5hwfsv/Untitled.png

Hahaha.....that's hilarious

[City Dad]

...gosh, just when I think there isn't anything I care less about than single-stall, gender-neutral bathrooms...

[DarkShadow]

...gosh, just when I think there isn't anything I care less about than single-stall, gender-neutral bathrooms...

Hey, also have to make sure The Gays don't get flowers for their wedding CD.

You have to have your priorities straight, like Good Ole Tom here.

[DockRat]

Post a sign.
"We have the right to refuse service"

It is supposed to be a free country.
All these BS rules, lawsuits. If they don't want your business the go somewhere else.
DR

[pcuser]

Post a sign.
"We have the right to refuse service"

It is supposed to be a free country.
All these BS rules, lawsuits. If they don't want your business the go somewhere else.
DR

Those BS rules are enshrined in the United States Constitution...

[DarkShadow]

Those BS rules are enshrined in the United States Constitution...

Is DockRat saying the US Constitution is BS?!?

You know how else thinks the US Constitution is BS? Terrorists, I tell you what.

DR, are you a terrorist?

[pcuser]

Perhaps DR should peruse the following link: https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/the-right-to-refuse-service-can-a-business-refuse-service-to-someone-because-of-appearance

[Tom]

Hey, also have to make sure The Gays don't get flowers for their wedding CD.

You have to have your priorities straight, like Good Ole Tom here.
The gays can have their flowers..just not from a christian flower shop
their is no reason for gays to buy from a christian flower shop that does not want to sell to them..they are free to go to a flower show that supports Gay
Why would someone who is Gay want to FORCE someone to sell them flowers that does not want to ??
Not that is Discrimination...deal with the gays or we put you out of Business?? YUP discrimination

[DockRat]

Is DockRat saying the US Constitution is BS?!?

Constitution ? Where is there anything about gays in it ? :LOL:
I'm just sick of all the BS lawsuits in this country. :LOL:
DR

The suit claims the accused of violating the Consumer Protection Act when she declined to provide floral arrangements to a regular customer's same-sex wedding because it went against her Christian beliefs.

1st Admendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

[Lady Quagga]

Constitution ? Where is there anything about gays in it ? :LOL:
I'm just sick of all the BS lawsuits in this country. :LOL:
DR

The suit claims the accused of violating the Consumer Protection Act when she declined to provide floral arrangements to a regular customer's same-sex wedding because it went against her Christian beliefs.

1st Admendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Actually DR, any state can pass laws offering greater anti-discriminatory protection than is provided by the U.S. Constitution or federal statute. In this particular case, LGBT consumers are protected by Washington state's Anderson-Murray Anti-Discrimination Law. Among other things, this law protects the LGBT community from discrimination at:


Public accommodations, meaning places open to the public such as businesses that sell goods or services, recreational facilities, providers of medical services and public schools.

More at: http://equalrightswashington.org/pdfs/Fact%20Sheet-WLAD%20Oct%2007%20English.pdf

I think almost everyone here is in agreement that the shop owner is entitled to believe whatever she wishes to believe. And personally speaking, I don't think she should be penalized as a private citizen for refusing to provide services through her business. But her business itself is subject to the laws of that state, and should be compelled to comply or suffer the consequences.

[Stinkbait]

^^So does she have recourse for the state forcing her to go against her beliefs, that is being Christian and not wanting to support the gay lifestyle.

[Lady Quagga]

^^So does she have recourse for the state forcing her to go against her beliefs, that is being Christian and not wanting to support the gay lifestyle.

I think the argument being made is that her 1st Amendment rights as a private citizen do not extend to her business, which is a public accommodation.

[DockRat]

Actually DR, any state can pass laws offering greater anti-discriminatory protection than is provided by the U.S. Constitution or federal statute. In this particular case, LGBT consumers are protected by Washington state's Anderson-Murray Anti-Discrimination Law. Among other things, this law protects the LGBT community from discrimination at:


Darkshadow was talking about the Constitution.
Where are you DS

http://i756.photobucket.com/albums/xx202/watchobs/DCIM/Ostrichheadinsand.jpg (http://media.photobucket.com/user/watchobs/media/DCIM/Ostrichheadinsand.jpg.html)

[Lady Quagga]

Darkshadow was talking about the Constitution.
Where are you DS

Oh to be sure, the LGBT community is protected by the Constitution, and it doesn't have to explicitly mention "LGBT" to do so. The Equal Protection Clause is one example (though it doesn't really apply in this case). The Tenth Amendment (which would uphold Washington state's right to pass the Anderson-Murray Anti-Discrimination Law) is another example.

[HawgZWylde]

Darkshadow was talking about the Constitution.
Where are you DS

http://i756.photobucket.com/albums/xx202/watchobs/DCIM/Ostrichheadinsand.jpg (http://media.photobucket.com/user/watchobs/media/DCIM/Ostrichheadinsand.jpg.html)

Gotta love it DR, liberals love the constitution when it works for them and will find any way around it when it works against them. The woman should have the right to refuse service to anyone she chooses, it indeed was a free country. The asshats could go anywhere else but instead they choose to destroy her and her business because they don't agree with her beliefs. Typical liberalism, if you don't agree with em, sue em into oblivion. That my friend is true greed...

[Lady Quagga]

Gotta love it DR, liberals love the constitution when it works for them and will find any way around it when it works against them. The woman should have the right to refuse service to anyone she chooses, it indeed was a free country. The asshats could go anywhere else but instead they choose to destroy her and her business because they don't agree with her beliefs. Typical liberalism, if you don't agree with em, sue em into oblivion. That my friend is true greed...

This isn't a Constitutional issue - the protections afforded the LGBT community have been established by state law. And like it or not, in Washington state a business doesn't have the right to refuse service based on a consumer's sexual orientation. And just because the word "greed" was used in another current thread doesn't mean it applies here. Had the business in question simply complied with state law, there would be no lawsuits - not for damages or anything else.

[Tom]

This isn't a Constitutional issue - the protections afforded the LGBT community have been established by state law. And like it or not, in Washington state a business doesn't have the right to refuse service based on a consumer's sexual orientation. And just because the word "greed" was used in another current thread doesn't mean it applies here. Had the business in question simply complied with state law, there would be no lawsuits - not for damages or anything else.

Good Point BUT the law is wrong. Why do Americans accept a law that tells a Business owner Who he can do Business with?
The reason is Americans no longer care and are ok with Big Brother.
The Government has No Business in My Business or anyones Business
The Law is Just Plain Wrong

[Lady Quagga]

Good Point BUT the law is wrong. Why do Americans accept a law that tells a Business owner Who he can do Business with?
The reason is Americans no longer care and are ok with Big Brother.
The Government has No Business in My Business or anyones Business
The Law is Just Plain Wrong

That is your opinion, and one the people of Washington state - through their duly elected state representatives - don't happen to agree with.

This is not a "Big Brother" issue, and the people of Washington state do care, enough in fact that they passed the Anderson-Murray Law.

Your logic would have us knee-deep in Jim Crow laws to this very day, and that would be "Just Plain Wrong".

[pcuser]

That is your opinion, and one the people of Washington state - through their duly elected state representatives - don't happen to agree with.

This is not a "Big Brother" issue, and the people of Washington state do care, enough in fact that they passed the Anderson-Murray Law.

Your logic would have us knee-deep in Jim Crow laws to this very day, and that would be "Just Plain Wrong".

I think he likes Jim Crow laws as he's a closet racist...

[santis32]

They always have the option to take their business elsewhere. They are only after two things 1. Money, 2. Someone to agree with their lifestyle.

[DarkShadow]

I think he likes Jim Crow laws as he's a closet racist...

The scariest part is that he doesn't get the connection between what his thoughts are in regards to this, and what those thoughts essentially say about him.

He continues to essentially say that discrimination should be legal. He didn't get the reference when MolluskMouth posted the following sign:

http://www.racismreview.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/no.jpg

Nor did he get the reference when MolluskMouth referred to Jim Crow laws.

THAT'S the sad part.

•

So, to sum up, Tom believes that having this sign:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FZ7nVsNYbdY/UBlgX1YTLlI/AAAAAAAAJDE/s_nEf48Nhxs/s1600/colored-sign.jpg

is totally OK, because the government making a law against discrimination is not right.

*Sigh*

[etucker1959]

if someone opened up a private fishing lake and said it was for ONLY Men A "Mens fishing club".....is that Discrimination also ??
Should the government get involved??
See if you see the similarities in the logic. In the today's Red states of the south, in the past (you could argue in the present also) they use to pass laws that were designed to keep African Americans from voting. (Jim Crow laws) They used many different tactics to accomplish this goal. I'll only talk about one today to keep my reputation in tact. (Buzz Killington) It was called the WHITE primary. To vote in big elections you first had to vote in the primary's. So the racist people in the south figured out a way to keep the blacks from voting in the primary's.

They said the democratic primary's could only be voted in, if you were a member of the party and the party had rules of who could join. Just like the Elk's club, the Knights of Columbus etc. The rules of membership were simple, A "White Mens only club" I mean party!!!!

[City Dad]

if a Christian store can refuse to serve homosexuals based on religious convictions, could they also refuse service to Jews?

and to take this a little further - could a Jewish doctor refuse to treat Gentiles because they consume pork and shellfish and it would be unclean?

are the lines bluring?

should there even be lines? If so, who get's to decide?

[Lady Quagga]

If so, who get's to decide?

The Raëlians.

[DarkShadow]

if a Christian store can refuse to serve homosexuals based on religious convictions, could they also refuse service to Jews?

and to take this a little further - could a Jewish doctor refuse to treat Gentiles because they consume pork and shellfish and it would be unclean?

are the lines bluring?

should there even be lines? If so, who get's to decide?

You can't visit my future fly shop because you have a "T" in your first name.

Go find your feathered quail peacock herl tungsten bead head UV dub chenille marabou zonker strips elsewhere.