| The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
| Anti-discrimination law https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=10431 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Elmarnieh [ Thu Sep 26, 2013 6:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | Anti-discrimination law |
http://tribuneherald.net/2013/08/23/kkk ... imination/ KKK wins lawsuit against bakery for discrimination Politics August 23, 2013 Comments: 6 A Georgia court has ruled in favor of the KKK in a discrimination lawsuit. A Georgia court has ruled in favor of Marshall Saxby, the Grand Wizard of a local KKK chapter, in a lawsuit stemming from two years ago when a local bakery denied him service. The three judge panel concluded unanimously that the bakery had violated civil rights laws by discriminating against Saxby when they refused to sell him a cake for his organization’s annual birthday party. Elaine Bailey, who owns Bailey Bakeries, refused to bake a cake for the ceremony because it violated her religious beliefs. Saxby filed the lawsuit claiming that Bailey’s refusal of service was discriminatory against his religious beliefs. The case is similar to the recent decision in New Mexico where a court has ruled that a photographer discriminated against a gay couple for refusing to provide them service. Bailey said in a prepared statement, “it’s a sad day when bigots have to be treated equally before the law. If they can discriminate against people, then surely I cannot be forced to support their beliefs by providing them services against my will.” Saxby was very happy with the outcome, stating “the law says that it’s wrong to discriminate against people if you run a business, and that means she was wrong in discriminating against our organization by refusing us service.” People on both sides of the issue have had varying remarks. One man stated “I am against anti-discrimination laws. Freedom means people are able to do what they wish with their lives and property. Society can punish bad behaviors in a market, but the power to take away from someones life as if it did not belong to them is frightening. Another person familiar with the case responded “This is not the same as denying service to someone based on the color of their skin or sexual preference. This was a choice by the owner of the bakery to not serve someone based on their bigoted lifestyle, and there’s nothing wrong with that.” Many wonder that if she had simply lied about her reasoning, would this have even been an issue. That leaves the question to the public, do they want discrimination to happen out in the open where people can pinpoint it, or do they want it to operate a cloaked manner where it happens but it’s hard to tell who is doing it? |
|
| Author: | Elmarnieh [ Thu Sep 26, 2013 6:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
So would you support such a ruling in reality, do you see a time when this would happen? |
|
| Author: | shuyung [ Thu Sep 26, 2013 9:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
She'd probably have won if she'd made the case that she refused to be an accessory to hate crime. |
|
| Author: | FarSky [ Thu Sep 26, 2013 9:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I would feel about this (imaginary) story the same way I feel about the referenced (and real) gay couple/bakery debacle: the business owner should have the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason, and the market decides whether or not to support that owner's choice. |
|
| Author: | Micheal [ Thu Sep 26, 2013 9:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Anti-discrimination law |
Elmarnieh wrote: http://tribuneherald.net/2013/08/23/kkk-wins-lawsuit-against-bakery-for-discrimination/ Bailey said in a prepared statement, “it’s a sad day when bigots have to be treated equally before the law. If they can discriminate against people, then surely I cannot be forced to support their beliefs by providing them services against my will.” Everybody must be treated equally under the law. (Insert long rant about slippery slopes here.) |
|
| Author: | Nitefox [ Thu Sep 26, 2013 5:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
FarSky wrote: I would feel about this (imaginary) story the same way I feel about the referenced (and real) gay couple/bakery debacle: the business owner should have the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason, and the market decides whether or not to support that owner's choice. Like |
|
| Author: | darksiege [ Thu Sep 26, 2013 6:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
sadly, it is like the WBC... I hate those ****. BUT... it is within their First Amendment right to be the hateful people they are. |
|
| Author: | Rorinthas [ Thu Sep 26, 2013 8:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Anti-discrimination law |
FarSky wrote: I would feel about this (imaginary) story the same way I feel about the referenced (and real) gay couple/bakery debacle: the business owner should have the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason, and the market decides whether or not to support that owner's choice. This essentially. It's one thing to not make a cake for a Person who happens to be a homosexual or in the KKK (discrimination of the person) and one designed in support of homosexual marriage or the KKK itself (discrimination of the message) . |
|
| Author: | Corolinth [ Thu Sep 26, 2013 8:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Anti-discrimination law |
It's what we as a society deserve for trying to tell shopkeepers that they have to cater to our liberal, politically-correct sensibilities. |
|
| Author: | TheRiov [ Thu Sep 26, 2013 9:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Apparently I'm the most liberal person on the board, but don't try to paint this as a liberal-conservative thing. I am not in favor of the ruling either. |
|
| Author: | Stathol [ Thu Sep 26, 2013 11:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Just to be clear, the linked story is satire. This didn't actually happen. |
|
| Author: | Hopwin [ Thu Sep 26, 2013 11:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
What is Turnitinbot[bot]? |
|
| Author: | FarSky [ Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Anti-discrimination law |
"Leading academic plagiarism checker technology for teachers and students. Online plagiarism detection ..." |
|
| Author: | Diamondeye [ Fri Sep 27, 2013 10:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Stathol wrote: Just to be clear, the linked story is satire. This didn't actually happen. Heh. |
|
| Author: | Sam [ Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
FarSky wrote: I would feel about this (imaginary) story the same way I feel about the referenced (and real) gay couple/bakery debacle: the business owner should have the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason, and the market decides whether or not to support that owner's choice. What happens in a small town with 2 grocers, when a person is found to be "x" and the 2 grocers are "y" and don't like "x"? Should they be allowed to deny service based on their feelings toward that person, even though that person is simply trying to by food? This seems mighty slippery slopish to me. Takes me to images of 1960's south. I didn't particularly like that era myself. I saw a lot of stuff that turned my stomach as a child. |
|
| Author: | Elmarnieh [ Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yes Sam, it is their property and right of association. |
|
| Author: | TheRiov [ Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
IIRC, food, accommodations, housing, transportation are all covered by the commerce clause, and the federal government can (and has) forbade discrimination based on that jurisdiction. But the Gov't has not ruled that it is illegal to discriminate based on homosexuality or political beliefs. |
|
| Author: | Sam [ Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Anti-discrimination law |
Maybe I'm just older and have had experiences some of you haven't. I've been discriminated against back in a time where it was easier to do, and more common. It isn't a world I wish to return to. |
|
| Author: | TheRiov [ Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Please don't get me wrong. Discrimination based on gender, orientation, sexual preference, religious affiliation, etc I abhor and feel the government has every right to outlaw in areas covered by the commerce clause. (though I feel it should be extended to cover medical and other 'essential' services, I'll admit there is little constitutional basis for it) I'm not certain that extends to political position though. To my knowledge we've never stated you cannot discriminate against someone because of the policies they espouse. |
|
| Author: | Wwen [ Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
You don't have the right to refuse service? |
|
| Author: | Rorinthas [ Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Anti-discrimination law |
Not since the mid 60s |
|
| Author: | Taskiss [ Sun Sep 29, 2013 7:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Wwen wrote: You don't have the right to refuse service? not if they're exercising their right to be gay. You, however, have the right to refuse service if someone is exercising their right to be armed. Gotta love constitutional protections! |
|
| Author: | Lex Luthor [ Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The same system that protects business owners from having their assets stolen also protects a gay person's right to service. It seems fair to me. The reduction of risk comes at a cost of freedoms. Play nice, or don't do business. |
|
| Author: | Wwen [ Tue Oct 01, 2013 1:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Gay isn't a choice though. Being a racist shitlord is. |
|
| Author: | DFK! [ Tue Oct 01, 2013 2:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Wwen wrote: Being a racist shitlord is. Hmm, what if it isn't? What if it's a genetic predisposition? |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|