sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
Within a generation or so this will be a moot point.
Less in my opinion. All three of my children (ages 39, 38, 29) see this as a non issue. Even folks my age are changing our opinions. I believe recent polling puts support for gay marriage somewhere above 50% depending on which poll you look at. I imagine that this issue will be done within ten years, tops.
sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
What if the customer isn't a person?
If it's not a person what the hell is it? For the record, I'll take anybody's (anything's?) money, also under the Washington State ADA you have to allow service animals in your establishment.
If you're trying to be coy about a religion being the customer, in the United States a corporation (which an organized religion is) is a legally the same as a person. See Citizens United v FEC. Which I think was probably legally correct but morally wrong. While we're at it, I think the Hobby Lobby decision was wrong. If I was CEO of Michael's (HL's main competition around here) I'd sue the Feds and demand equal treatment under the 14th Amendment.
it just seems to me religion in general primarily makes truly bad people worse, not genuinly good people better; and in many cases has even made good people do bad things in the name of their religion.
just curious, a personal poll if you will.
what are you guys' current views on religion as a whole?
Fatherfirst, OTWO, done4good:
I've pointed out what the churches have been doing for the homeless (among other things, but the homeless camps are a good example). You have countered that people don't need a religion to get together and accomplish good things. I agree they shouldn't need it. The trouble is, at least around here, they don't seem to actually DO something. There is lots and lots of talk, the problem gets studied from all angles and everybody agrees that we should give the homeless a home - in somebody else's neighborhood. The thing the churches do best is convince the faithful that some degree of personal sacrifice and/or inconvenience is necessary to do good.
The above process has become so well-established on all sorts of things it is now referred to as "the Seattle way." Anytime you feel like trying to herd cats, come on out.
sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
V
Our attorney general says that under the under the Washington State Consumer Protection Act it is against the law to discriminate against your customers based on religion, race, creed, and sexual orientation. Since this is the law he's using to crack down on Arlene's Flowers, I'm going to take him at his word.
I operate a small consulting business, which I would like to keep going. I'm not going to buck the AG's office on a dubious claim from somebody that doesn't even live here that it is legal to discriminate against customers that belong to a religion I don't like.
You can operate your business how ever you like. Mine doesn't engage in identity discrimination.
it just seems to me religion in general primarily makes truly bad people worse, not genuinly good people better; and in many cases has even made good people do bad things in the name of their religion.
just curious, a personal poll if you will.
what are you guys' current views on religion as a whole?
Fatherfirst, I don't know if today's good outweighs yesterday's bad. I'm sure the people who live in Tent City appreciate having a place to live. Seattle is a very liberal city, and one of the most unchurched. Yet it is the churches that are largely meeting this need.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tent_city#Seattle.2C_Washington
sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
"What, specific law do you think talks about all customers and not people based on protected classes?"
What I think is irrelevant. The State Attorney General said "Our law against discrimination prevents you from discriminating on the basis of race or religion or, since 2006, sexual orientation. If you do that in a consumer setting, you're automatically violating our consumer protection laws," (source cited in my earlier post). If you think you know more than the attorney General, please enlighten me.
However, I think he was referring to RCW 49.60.030
I said I am opposed to discrimination at all levels, for whatever reason.
You said: I am not.
Now you get to answer a question: Do you think discrimination based on some one's group identity is morally proper in some cases. If yes, which ones?
Since I expect some one will throw this back at me; yes, I think discrimination based on group identity is wrong in all cases. Yes I know, that means the Christians are wrong when they discriminate against the LGBTQ* community.
I also don't think the LGBTQ* community does itself any favors by making discriminatory statements back. There are some open minded churches around. I frequently drive by a Methodist church in downtown Bellevue WA that has a flag very like this on the facade:
They deserve to be recognized for standing apart on this issue.
sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
The Washington State Attorney General seems to think the state's consumer protection laws protect against discrimination based on, among other things, religion. I would go with his opinion, unless you can demonstrate otherwise.
I assume your second post is aimed at somebody else, but I'll comment anyway. The 14th amendment clearly applies to everybody. The choice available to civil servants is to not be civil servants. I also think this applies to any minister who signs marriage certificates. If they sign any, they needs to sign all of them.
Let me make myself plain. I am opposed to discrimination at all levels, for whatever reason. I am also, frankly very terrified off putting too much power into the hands of the government to control "thought crime." It starts us down a very slippery slope.
I don't think passing a law making bigotry illegal is the same thing as ending bigotry, people will just hide it. Twenty-five years ago, I believed that homosexuals deserved whatever they got. Now I'm paying for a lesbian wedding (which BTW I'm very glad is legal in the two States involved). Arriving at this change of opinion took a long time and a lot of soul searching. I'm quite sure the owner of Arlene's flowers will never change her mind on the subject, and certainly her treatment over the last two years will do nothing to encourage her to change her mind.
As they say, its easier to catch flies with honey.
i watched some of the segments on the jw broadcast.
in the video they showed how they managed their inventory orders for the congregations.
at the conclusion it was stated by the narrator how god is speeding up the work.. the problem is the system they implemented has been used for over two decades in logistics.
sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
How is that in any way the same thing?
It's the same thing because Washington State law requires companies serving the public to provide identical services to all customers and potential customers that seek to do business with them. You can't discriminate based on what you think of the customer.
General comment, but particularly DJS needs to read this, since he apparently didn't pay attention to my post about my daughter. I am opposed to discrimination against lots of people, including, but not limited to people located anywhere on the gender spectrum, any religious belief or none, any race etc. I am not now a member of any religious group, nor have I been for at least six years.
I just think a few people here would be well served by thinking through the possible results of actions they want taken. It seems that some of you are in such a rush to fence in a group you have made it obvious you don't like; that you can't see who else might get scooped up in your net.
Maybe I should stop expecting you to think about any position but your own.
it just seems to me religion in general primarily makes truly bad people worse, not genuinly good people better; and in many cases has even made good people do bad things in the name of their religion.
just curious, a personal poll if you will.
what are you guys' current views on religion as a whole?
Anything that brings a big bunch of people together will produce both good and bad results; religion, politics, soccer, pop music, freeways, beer, you name it. I don't think painting entire groups with one big brush is helpful.
Here in Seattle we have had, for many years, a roaming tent encampment for homeless people that are allowed to set up at certain locations for a period of time. Many, if not most, of those locations have been in church parking lots. For a very long time one was set up next to a church that let us use their fellowship hall for an AA meeting. The camp was clean, safe, quiet and well run. For that matter, the AA group had an inexpensive place to meet.
So who here wants to provide an alternative location for these two groups?
