Two quotes from page 1 that correctly assert what will actually happen in MS.

From your first post on page 2 of the thread where you reference yourself while ignoring what was clearly stated on page 1.


You can say it's not personal, but you posted something that contradicts that assertion.

_________________

I had no desire to get married in a Catholic Church, even as I'm technically Catholic. Notice I didn't say I "was denied".

So, Mr. False Premise, are you going to answer if you think the Mississippi law is right or wrong?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

The government compelling anyone to engage their own protected rights in service of others against their will is concerning to me, yes, no matter for whom that specific kind of service is being compelled. You don't have a protected right to serve an egg white frittata, but you do have a right to express yourself through artistry like writing, baking, photography, and so forth, along with a specifically delineated right to be free from servitude of others against your will.

I think the slippery slope of "your right to be free is meaningful and protected up until the point popular society decides, unilaterally, that it isn't" is much worse than any other reasonably foreseeable outcome. Because then "right to be free" easily becomes "right to free speech" (hate speech laws) or "right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure" (stop and frisk).

I find it truly concerning, and quite telling, that your first word in reply to the question of whether we as a society, at some point, should reasonably consider the rights of those being compelled into service is "no".

No private entity should be compelled to perform a service that they don't want to.

As much as Elmhurst Steve is a raging asswipe, as a business owner, it is his prerogative to deny service. It's just costing him money. Now, if he were so stupid to say, "I won't provide your service because you're gay and I don't agree with your lifestyle" or "because you're black" or whatever, then it is the right of the offended party to blast with negative feedback. However, he should not be compelled to perform this service or whatever.

The issue with Mississippi is that the state is sponsoring the bigotry. To have authority give their OK to this is something they have no business participating in. And to top it off, it's a one sided approval.

_________________

So just to be clear, you are fine with ALL types of segregation?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

When you respond to something I actually said, I'll respond to you in kind.

What you quoted and then what you said indicates that you are fine with any type of segregation.

Am I wrong?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

You brought up [b]yourself[/b] as an example here as an example of someone that would have been denied service.

Are you now saying you didn't make it personal?

_________________

Completely disagree. This was fought and settled 50+ years ago.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

_________________

You said I have personal issues with the Catholic Church. A hypothetical that I didn't want anyways would not be proof of that.

So, Mr. False Premise, are you going to answer if you think the Mississippi law is right or wrong?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

One of my high school teachers told us a story about how he misspelled "Mississippi" on a term paper. Since the word was used throughout the paper, he made the mistake over and over again. In the days of typewriters, it was easy to make such a mistake.

As for the topic at hand, I have nothing to add. Just thought I'd lighten the mood.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

Yes, very.

How you got "you are fine with any type of segregation" from:



Is beyond me. Well, I mean, I know how you got there, but that's JDC-levels of intellectual dishonesty and fallacious reasoning.

Being an ignorant shitbag should hit the ignorant shitbag where it really hurts the most.

_________________

what about soufflés? does that count as artistry?

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest

So you have repeatedly taken pains to incorrectly state the positions of the Catholic Church and the Pope in this thread because it's not personal and your false statements are now hypotheticals?

_________________

So your issue is that I was too broad.

I'll make it easier.
Do you think businesses should be able to deny services to customers because of their race?
Do you think they should be able to put up a sign that says they will not serve customer of a specific race?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

You can't just say things like this and make it so.

Based on his statements on his last visit, is the Pope for or against the Mississippi law? Is this not exactly what he meant by "religious liberty"? Have some actual content in your response.

So, Mr. False Premise, are you going to answer if you think the Mississippi law is right or wrong?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

This has been stated clearly by the present Pope and the Catholic Church. It appears that you are personally uninterested in looking any place that contradicts your personal feelings toward the Catholic Church.

I was trying to provide you with some coverage but your statement that I somehow partake in denying service to gay people is actually an outright lie. And you know that. Yet you continue to repeat it.

But most of all, after two posters correctly pointed out that the Catholic Church will suffer at the hands of this law, you attacked the church just like the state of MS has.

Who is the bigot now?

_________________

Link on this please: "This(denying services to anyone based on sexual preference is wrong) has been stated clearly by the present Pope and the Catholic Church."

So, Mr. False Premise, are you going to answer if you think the Mississippi law is right or wrong?

No more Seacrest BS please. Provide that link and that answer and we can move on.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Still too broad, and a not-so-clever attempt to dismiss my points as coming from a racist.

What "businesses" are we talking about? What is entailed by the service they provide? Does it require the co-opting of the operator's otherwise protected rights?

Furthermore, what constitutes a "business" for the purposes of this discussion? What about hobbyists or amateurs?

Your false premises have been exposed.

Your outright lies to try and prove an imaginary point have been exposed as well.

You've been exposed by your own posts as a bigot toward Catholics.

So since you say it's not personal animus, that only leaves intentional animus.

Enjoy.

_________________

That's a lot of words to avoid answering a very simple question.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

How far a stretch is it to think that a law such as this can set precedent that might allow someone whose religion has been offended by someone converting from a certain religion to allow the punishment prescribed by that religion?
It is after all, protection of religious freedom... practicing as one sees fit?

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

My understanding is that this law is only allowable insofar as a person being a fruit is (sadly) not a protected class of person in this country (e.g., you can't legally discriminate because someone's old, or black, or Jewish, or a veteran, and some others) but since there's no language at the federal level to protect the gays, et al, Mississippi can get away with this because the law says that the state won't take legal action against those who discriminate on the basis of sexual preference - meaning it's not that it's allowed (albeit the fairly obvious inference is that it's encouraged), but instead the state won't stand in your way if you want to discriminate that way.

Which, among other things, would seem to indicate that the Supreme Court wouldn't listen to the case if it were dropped in their laps today as it's not breaking any Constitutional or Federal statute.

At least that's my understanding of it. I could be wrong; it's happened on rare occasions.

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George

Hey pittmike,
Since my thoughts here offend you so much.

Can you provide me a link that shows that the Pope is against, or would be against, this law in Mississippi? From everything I understand, his speech about "religious liberty" was pretty much exactly about things like this.

Thanks.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

he's talking about Christians being exterminated in the mid-east and cuba/china where it is illegal. forcing nuns to pay for birth control is debatable. he doesn't care about bakers putting dicks on cakes.

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest

So why do you think he would be against the Mississippi law?

Given his thoughts on the nuns birth control thing and him meeting with the gay hating city clerk I think it is very likely that he would approve of the Mississippi law too and he could VERY easily take a stand on it if he didn't.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

well he hasn't said anything because no matter what he says will open a can of worms. how do you reconcile the sanctity of human free will with the government forcing you to do things. no matter what you say about it people like you will pick it apart.

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest

What can of worms?

We figured this out a long time ago in this country. "human free will" does not get chosen over equality in regards to gender or racial segregation.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!