No, mrhhome. One has the right to practice his/her religion, but does not have the right to discriminate against or harrass others that do not share the same religion. No one is saying she does not have the right to practice her religion.
JW refuses to provide wedding stationery to Gay couple
by KateWild 176 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
cofty
mrhhome - Please explain why its right that a business is not allowed refuse to serve a black man on the basis that the owner is a white supremacist, but it's not right that they can't similarly discriminate against gay men by hiding behind religion?
-
DJS
Homey,
"Sex life"? Does that include heteros? WTF? Please, kind sir, come into the 21st Century. I know it seems scary, but it is wonderful. You are making our case much better than we could. You clearly have a lot of hatred towards gays. Look inside yourself and try to figure out why. For me it was like flipping a switch. As I've noted before on this site, I looked at my 2 beautiful amazing children when they were about 10 and 12, and I was an elder at the time, and thought to myself there is no fukkking chance I am going to DF them from my life if either or both is gay. None. Nada. Wasn't going to happen. Ever. From that day forward I couldn't care less.
-
wanderlust
Additionally, it is not a burden for businesses to treat all customers fairly and with respect. Attempting to imply that the reduction in new business has something to do with not being able to discriminate against who they want is ridiculous.
-
abbasgreta
A Christian couple were running a successful Guest House in the South-West of England. Their consciences permitted only
married couples to book double rooms - by this term they meant a 'man and woman' couple. I don't know if their ads mentioned this or
if it was expressly advertised as a 'Christian' Guest House. However I believe it was not necessary for a 'married couple' who arrived for
booking-in to be questioned about their status.
NO unmarried couple, who were 'refused such accommodation ON RELIGIOUS GROUNDS' either by phone/internet or as walk-ins,
IF offended by their stance, took any action against them in the decades they ran the establishment.
They refused to book some walk-ins, a gay couple, into a double room. They offered them 2 singles, which the gay couple refused.
They are NOT homophobics (hatred for anyone is anti-Christian and abhorrent to them), but their consciences could not permit this situation
and they explained that their declining them a double room was based ON RELIGIOUS GROUNDS, EXACTLY the same as for an unmarried couple.
(What is 'morally right and wrong' is not the point of this posting.)
The gay couple sued them for discrimination based on sexual orientation. The Christian couple lost at court and had to pay substantial damages and court costs which
resulted in them closing the guest house and having to put it up for sale.
They took their case to the European Court of Appeal but again their 'religious conviction' citings were NOT HELD UP and they lost that too.
They are financially ruined and now have no means of income to support themselves.
So it would appear that 'religious convictions' have no bearing whatsoever in a 'sexually-oriented discimination' law-suit.
What do you make of this case?
(ps This is a true story, retold as best as my memory serves me. Happened last year).
-
cofty
Yes I remember that case.
Their decision to refuse to rent a room to a gay couple is morally identical to the way landlords used to put "No blacks" signs in their guesthouse windows back in the 50s.
You can decide who comes into your private home but when you turn your home into a business you lose your right to discriminate.
Calling your prejudice "a matter of religious conscience" is meaningless.
-
DJS
greta's dad,
Justice was served. And they had a really bad lawyer. WTF do you expect? Britain, like the US, is a constitutional democracy/monarchy.
-
mrhhome
DJS,
"Sex life"? Does that include heteros? WTF?
Actually, it does include "heteros." I resent the over-sexualization of our society. I resent that I cannot watch a college football game with my young daughters for fear of commercials that portray woman as sex objects.
Let's turn the question around. As required by federal regulation, the banking industry is treats the porn industry as high risk, and as such, regularly denies service. Since we are talking about sexuality, why is it OK for the banking industry to refuse service to porn stars but not OK for a baker to refuse service to a homosexual couple?
Who is out picketing for the porn star's rights?
You clearly have a lot of hatred towards gays.
Thank you for making my point. Where exactly did I say that I hate homosexuals? Where?
I disagree with same sex marriage. I believe that a business should have the right to refuse service to anyone. I resent the militant tactics of the LGBT organizations that sue businesses, force boards to fire CEOs over donations to political groups, and publically trash anyone who disagrees with them. But where did I state that I hate gays? Cannot I not disagree with someone without being accused of being a hate monger?
Quite the opposite, I have had friends who were gay. Of course, I also have friends who were Democrats that did not like my guns, and friends that were Baptist that do not like my whiskey. Fair enough. They do their thing. I do mine. In my wayward college days, I was even pleasantly surprised to discover that some of my lesbians friends were actually bi-sexuals.
The difference is that I can disagree with them without facing a lawsuit.
I was an elder at the time
Why am I not surprised....
-
cofty
I belief that a business should have the right to refuse service to anyone
So should a shop have the right to put a "No blacks" sign in their window?
-
abbasgreta
Cofty: I have edited it - I forgot something relevant which pertains to your comment. Perhaps you would re-read it?