This won't take away our joy': North Carolina wedding venue denies gay couple marriage

Of course you can post as you see fit but I'll say this, that poster is obviously a fan of a game I like to call "chase your tail"
Playing obtuse aint the word...

 

No doubt, I picked up on it. Not playing that game.

 

With all the things the left has shut down using the virus as an excuse along with all the things they've cancelled because of feelings, they should be sorta used to stuff like this.

 

They should sue that place.

 

Why?

 

Sometimes I play it with telemarketers, the goal is simply to see how much of their time you can waste.

 

just went over that. It’s a marriage identical to yours.

And I have the legal right to point out your statement was incorrect.

 

Discrimination.

 

So you don't believe that private persons responsible for a private property, have the right to refuse access and/or service as they see fit?

You understand that private property laws trump other related laws when it comes to this stuff, dontcha? The owner or owner's representative has full and complete rights to refuse entry and/or service to any person, for ANY reason, at any time. No explanation is required, nor can be demanded. Whether it's your private home or your business premises, the law applies to all private property.

 

You probably shouldn't take such a condescending tone when you are so completely and totally mistaken.
I mean you are 100 percent wrong.
It is amazing to me that someone would not be aware of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and be so smug about it.
Do yourself a favour, Google "can i refuse service business" or some such sentence, and then get back to us regarding this issue.
Sexual orientation is NOT one of the protected classes which is why this business was alowed to deny service to the couple (and an example of why the LGBTQ community would like to be recognized as a protected class). Some states, like California have made it illegal to deny service based on sexual preference.

 

People are banned from Twitter all the time simply for their values and political positions. Even this forum has its own set of guidelines or standards regarding what it finds tolerable or acceptable. Polygamy is illegal in the USA. So why shouldn't a catering hall decide to whom it will cater. It's not like there aren't other catering halls from which to choose. Unlike the mainstream media, it's kinda refreshing to see that some people still have standards though. I bet leftists hate that.

 

Actually it's opposite. And opposite is no more identical than your image in a mirror is a real person.

 

God discriminates.

 

Different issue. PRIVATE PROPERTY laws allow the owner or representative to refuse entry/service to anyone, at any time, for any reason. No explanation is required, and an explanation cannot be demanded.

You have to understand that this (private property law) is where the buck stops. If I don't like the look of you ... your skin tone, or your sexual orientation, or the quality of your shoes - I can deny you entry/service, or ask you to leave if you're already in. I have no obligation to tell you why, and you are not entitled to KNOW why. It's my private property, and I tolerate your presence only if it suits me.

Some business owners make the make the mistake of telling the customer exactly why they're being refused entry/service - and those idiots deserve everything they get. But again, that has nothing to do with private property law.

 

No, but you suggested that it is OK to refuse service based on discrimination.
It's not a big step to go from discriminating based on sexuality to discriminating based on colour.

 

They do not have the right to discriminate based on race, nationality, gender, sexual preference, disability etc.
You cannot post signs like this anymore.

 

Irrelevant, different issue. Private Property laws are very clear. Right of refusal to anyone, at any time, for ANY reason.

 

It a public business, it has a license.

 

OK. Then, I need to clarify because that is not my position at all.

First, I don't really care for the "politically correct" agenda because all it does is prevent people from saying what they want to say which leads to more hatred and animosity. I say let it all hang out and let the chips fall where they may. At least, one would know where they truly stand.

Secondly, that idea somewhat morphs into tangible things - say a wedding cake or wedding venue. The owners of those business clearly do not want certain patrons and, as owners, they should have the right to say that. I wouldn't want a cake baked by someone that hated I was marrying someone of the same gender (what they heck might they put in it?). I wouldn't want to be married somewhere I wasn't welcome because I am marrying someone of the same gender (why would I want my special day ruined by the barely hidden judgment and animosity?). The same thing applies to race. Why would I want to eat something made by a racist? Why would I want to give my money to some venue that hates me solely for the color of my skin? Again, I say, let it all hang out and let the chips (in these cases loss of a paying customer) fall where they may.

Before you (the reader) get to flying across the keyboard to lambast me, let me say this first. I absolutely do NOT believe prejudice should exist. However, we live in a world where it does. Trying to force someone to not be prejudiced only causes them to resort to other ways of hating (X target) in more subtle ways. For example, redlining and steering. For example, forced quotas. You can't legislate hatred. Let the racists, sexists, homophobic, intolerant jerks say what they want to say so the rest of us can tell them to "go to hell" and take our business elsewhere. Yes, it's painful to be hated for no reason other than who we are but it's even harder living in a world where everyone has a fake smile while stabbing us in the back.

----------------------

And, the other side of that equation is what it currently happening with Facebook and Twitter and their banning of Donald Trump.

Should a private business owner BE REQUIRED to do business with everyone? Sure, it would be nice if they did but at what costs? They call it cancel culture now but the practice has been going on since the beginning of time when a large majority doesn't like someone and there is a mass exodus (or threat of one) to get the business owner to do their bidding. We saw this happen on television and radio. Sponsors would drop their advertising if black people were allowed. And, the very people that participated in that or condoned it are some of the same people whining because Dr. Seuss' company's board made a decision to discontinue some of their publications.

Further, why should a business owner be obligated to do business with someone they don't want to do business with? Why should I pay rent on commercial space, advertising, employees, insurance just to be FORCED to deal with anyone who walks through the door for my product or service? What if I don't like purple aliens? I don't want to be around purple aliens and I don't want their purple alien money. Why can't I just say "No"? Or, what if I love purple aliens but my employees don't? Or, my sponsors don't? Or, my dog's sitter doesn't like them and they threaten to put me out of business if I do business with the purple alien?

It all leads to the same place (denial of service). I'm just saying we should be honest about it.

 

name one

thanks

 

Sure, but if you keep refusing service to one of the protected groups you will face prosecution. Well, that's how it works here in the UK. You do not have the right to refuse service for ANY reason. There are laws against discrimination.

 

It is the owners right. This is stated in the article as well

 

It's about equal rights.
It's a shame that legislation is necessary to ensure equal rights but here we are. Without such legislation we'd be back to white's only drinking fountains and ''get to the back of the bus''.

 

You don't believe there are enough minorities, females, homosexual people and people that don't hate anybody in those groups to make society work in spite of the bigots?

By the way, I didn't make a distinction in my response but I do agree with it being mandated in government positions.

 

They are a private enterprise, conducting business within private property. They are thus subject to all the protections of private property laws.