Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

The Flowers and the Wedding -- Just the FACTS, please

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    I'm not seeing a first amendment issue here, any more than the diner owner denying service to the black man in the Jim Crow era was a first amendment issue. Discrimination is discrimination, whatever it's justification.
    They are refusing to assist or participate in a gay wedding because of religious conviction. That is their right by the first amendment. There is no biblical passages about not serving black people in restaurants. There are passages that homosexuality is a sin and that we are not to participate or celebrate sin.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
      I'm not seeing a first amendment issue here, any more than the diner owner denying service to the black man in the Jim Crow era was a first amendment issue. Discrimination is discrimination, whatever it's justification.
      If someone refused service to an intending customer in an ordinary commercial setting, I'd be inclined to agree. The intending customer who walks into a bakery and wants to buy what is on offer and gets refused service - that's one thing.

      Denying a person the right to refuse a contract to provide services is a different thing altogether - it is forced labour.
      sigpic1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
        They are refusing to assist or participate in a gay wedding because of religious conviction.
        Religion cannot be used as a smokescreen for bigotry.

        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
        That is their right by the first amendment.
        The first amendment prohibits the government from establishing a religion, and enables an individual the freedom to practice their chosen faith without government intrusion. No one is prohibiting anyone from practicing their faith. If the florist does not sell flowers for weddings, there will be no conflict. If they choose to sell flowers for weddings, they cannot do so in a discriminatory fashion. Every right has a limit.

        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
        There is no biblical passages about not serving black people in restaurants. There are passages that homosexuality is a sin and that we are not to participate or celebrate sin.
        I frankly couldn't give a fig what the bible says.
        The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

        I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by tabibito View Post
          If someone refused service to an intending customer in an ordinary commercial setting, I'd be inclined to agree. The intending customer who walks into a bakery and wants to buy what is on offer and gets refused service - that's one thing.

          Denying a person the right to refuse a contract to provide services is a different thing altogether - it is forced labour.
          No - there is no forced labor involved. That's a canard. It is requiring that a business provide their service equitably and without discrimination. If I will provide flowers for your wedding because you are white, but I will not provide flowers for your wedding because you are black - that is discrimination. If I will provide flowers for your wedding because you are heterosexual, but I will not provide flowers for your wedding because you are homosexual, that is discrimination. It's no more complex than that.

          And no one is "forcing" anyone to work. They can simply stop providing flowers for weddings and they will retain their alignment with their religion and avoid any form of discrimination. In other words, there is a path by which they can follow their conscience AND avoid discrimination. They cannot complain that they shouldn't be required to do so because it is "inconvenient."
          The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

          I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
            I frankly couldn't give a fig what the bible says.
            Do we also assume that you would not object if another person had the right to decide whom you are going to work for?
            sigpic1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
              No - there is no forced labor involved. That's a canard. It is requiring that a business provide their service equitably and without discrimination. If I will provide flowers for your wedding because you are white, but I will not provide flowers for your wedding because you are black - that is discrimination. If I will provide flowers for your wedding because you are heterosexual, but I will not provide flowers for your wedding because you are homosexual, that is discrimination. It's no more complex than that.
              There's a difference between "providing flowers" and actually becoming part of the celebration. You can come into my shop and buy anything I sell, whether you are white, black, polkadotted, gay, straight.... but you cannot force me to attend and plan your same-sex wedding or stage your KKK rally.

              And no one is "forcing" anyone to work. They can simply stop providing flowers for weddings and they will retain their alignment with their religion and avoid any form of discrimination. In other words, there is a path by which they can follow their conscience AND avoid discrimination. They cannot complain that they shouldn't be required to do so because it is "inconvenient."
              Nope. If you were a baker, and somebody asked you to bake a cake with "[f bomb][N-word]", should you be obligated to comply? If somebody wanted you to create a cake depicting a naked heterosexual couple copulating, should you be forced to comply? Or would you simply give up your baking business?
              "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                Religion cannot be used as a smokescreen for bigotry.
                So the government can define anything as bigotry to get around the 1st amendment? Please.





                I frankly couldn't give a fig what the bible says.
                That is clear. Luckily the 1st amendment says that the government can't interfere with my religious views or practices.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                  So the government can define anything as bigotry to get around the 1st amendment? Please.
                  That was never a part of my argument.

                  Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                  That is clear. Luckily the 1st amendment says that the government can't interfere with my religious views or practices.
                  A position I 100% agree with. Fortunately, nothing about what I have said suggests that they should.

                  No "liberty" is ever 100%. There is always a balance. One person's freedoms end where another person's begin. There is always a need to balance. There are limits, even to religious liberty.
                  The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                  I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                    No "liberty" is ever 100%. There is always a balance. One person's freedoms end where another person's begin.
                    But that only works one way, in your world. The same-sex couple has the freedom to have their wedding and celebration, but I do not have the freedom not to participate in that. If they want ME to do their cake or flowers, their freedom is unlimited, but mine is not. Yeah, that's fair!
                    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                      That was never a part of my argument.
                      It is the outcome of your argument. If "bigotry" is a counter to the 1st amendment then the government just needs to define something as "bigotry" to stop anyone's religious views.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                        It is the outcome of your argument. If "bigotry" is a counter to the 1st amendment then the government just needs to define something as "bigotry" to stop anyone's religious views.
                        When the government begins willy-nilly defining things as "bigotry," then we have a recourse to vote them out of office. I don't see a problem here.
                        The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                        I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                          But that only works one way, in your world.
                          No.

                          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                          The same-sex couple has the freedom to have their wedding and celebration, but I do not have the freedom not to participate in that.
                          Sure you do. First, making a flower arrangement is not "participating in your wedding." But even if you think it is, all the person needs to do is stop making flower arrangements for weddings, and no one will object or have a problem. The person gets to adhere to their religious beliefs, and no discrimination is involved. Simple.

                          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                          If they want ME to do their cake or flowers, their freedom is unlimited, but mine is not. Yeah, that's fair!
                          See above. You offer a false dichotomy.
                          The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                          I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                            When the government begins willy-nilly defining things as "bigotry," then we have a recourse to vote them out of office. I don't see a problem here.
                            They already ARE. You just happen to agree with them at the moment.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                              No.
                              Yes.

                              Sure you do. First, making a flower arrangement is not "participating in your wedding."
                              Your ignorance of the wedding business is duly noted.

                              I actually oversee weddings as part of my livelihood, and I actually interact with florists. They don't just "make flower arrangements" - they spend quite a bit of time interacting with the couple, delivering the arrangements to the venue and setting them up, usually with candles and draperies and other accents.

                              But even if you think it is,
                              I don't just "think" it is.

                              all the person needs to do is stop making flower arrangements for weddings, and no one will object or have a problem.
                              Or the couple could engage a DIFFERENT florist!

                              The person gets to adhere to their religious beliefs, and no discrimination is involved. Simple.
                              Yes, the couple can choose a DIFFERENT florist, and everybody can be happy!
                              "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                                No.



                                Sure you do. First, making a flower arrangement is not "participating in your wedding." But even if you think it is, all the person needs to do is stop making flower arrangements for weddings, and no one will object or have a problem. The person gets to adhere to their religious beliefs, and no discrimination is involved. Simple.



                                See above. You offer a false dichotomy.

                                You do realize that doing wedding flowers is a HUGE portion of a florist's business, don't you? Are you really suggesting that a business owner refuse to sell flowers for ALL weddings in order to satisfy the selfishness of one or two people who can't possibly find a hundred other florists who would be happy to fill their needs?

                                That is absolute stupidity on your part to simply say "just stop doing wedding flowers".


                                Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Christian3, Today, 02:14 PM
                                5 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Maranatha  
                                Started by seer, Today, 02:00 PM
                                0 responses
                                22 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post seer
                                by seer
                                 
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, 10-24-2020, 08:17 AM
                                10 responses
                                92 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                                Started by LiconaFan97, 10-23-2020, 04:56 PM
                                32 responses
                                202 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post seer
                                by seer
                                 
                                Started by Juvenal, 10-23-2020, 11:08 AM
                                10 responses
                                103 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Juvenal
                                by Juvenal
                                 
                                Working...
                                X