69% Republicans: Businesses Should Be Able to Refuse Gays

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 06, 2015 2:04 AM GMT
    NYT: 69 percent of Republicans say small-business owners who provide wedding-related services should be able to refuse, on the basis of their religious belief, such services to same-sex couples. But 58 percent of Democrats think the businesses should be required to provide those services.

    The poll was conducted by telephone, on landlines and cellphones nationwide, from April 30 to May 3 with 1,027 adults, of whom 868 were registered to vote. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus three percentage points for all adults and registered voters.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/06/us/politics/hillary-clinton-gains-favor-times-cbs-poll-says.html?_r=0
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 06, 2015 5:25 AM GMT
    I wonder how the gay republicans sleep at night. It must be hard for them to be gay, if they really are.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    May 06, 2015 4:59 PM GMT
    Another Intentionally Misleading Title by Woodsmen.

    Original Title

    "Hillary Clinton’s Appeal Survives Scrutiny, Poll Says"
    The Woodsmen Title
    "69% Republicans: Businesses Should Be Able to Refuse Gays"

    His title change is based on 1 paragraph out of the entire 26 paragraphs and the statistics of the article are all debatable with contradictory data easily found with a quick web search.

    Finding this brings up a more important issue than one member's propensity for creating false and misleading headlines. So this is the end of talking about Woodsman.

    The full quote is below (it's the same old wedding cake drama you've read before)
    In addition, 69 percent of Republicans say small-business owners who provide wedding-related services should be able to refuse, on the basis of their religious belief, such services to same-sex couples. But 58 percent of Democrats think the businesses should be required to provide those services.
    Please be patient while I explain how and why this is bullshit.
    People who self identify as Democrats are about 31% of the population.
    People who self identify as Republicans are about 26% of the population.
    This poll doesn't seem to include the largest percentage of voters; Independents who make up 42% of voters. if you don't think the opinions of Independents don't matter in politics then you're fooling yourself. You being manipulated by the biased two party media into conceiving of politics as a simplistic "us against them" - Republican vs Democrat- good vs evil fantasy that is better suited for video games about castles dragons and kings.
    Independent voters.
    http://www.gallup.com/poll/166763/record-high-americans-identify-independents.aspx
    Let's take a look at what lies one level below the above figures cited in Woodsman's article.
    69% of Republicans (x 26% =18% of voters) and
    42% of Democrats (x 31% = 13% of voters)
    Totaled = ONLY 31% of voters who DO NOT SUPPORT forcing businesses to selling wedding cakes to gays.

    D
    oes that give you an idea of how important Independent voters' opinions and votes really are?


    Now start asking yourself why they are not factored in to all polls. The minds of 57% of voters will not change because they are party loyalists. The media is geared to influencing the opinions of the 42% of Independents who have no allegiance to either party and predominantly vote on issues not ideology by presenting every issue as simplistic "us against them" - Conservative vs Liberal- good vs evil fantasy battle to the death attempting to compel Independents to take sides.

    Why the fuck do you guys, Republicans and Democrats, keep falling for it? It's not about you. It's about us Independents.

    More coming later, maybe.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 06, 2015 8:34 PM GMT
    bobbobbob said
    It's about us Independents.

    Independent? You???

    lolololololol

    hahahahah
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    May 07, 2015 12:57 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    bobbobbob said
    It's about us Independents.

    Independent? You???

    lolololololol

    hahahahah


    You are certainly no judge of anything about people... You're hold the record for being the most prolific lying scumbag in RJ with all lies you like to throw out about any-damned-person your nasty lying fat ass Narcissistic queenie self decides not to like... "he's a sock puppet!" He's has other accounts" "he's a paid right wing operative" "he's a bigot" "he's a racist." "he's a homophobe" "he's a hater."

    And on top of this your nasty lying fat ass Narcissistic queenie self HAS NEVER even attempted to try to prove ONE F**KING THING YOU'VE BEEN CHALLENGED ON. You just lie with no remorse or conscience.. even about fly fishing which from your owen word about it it was apparent you've never done. You made up PURE SHIT about Jeb Bush having registered several times to vote as a Hispanic and made no effort to either prove you were telling the truth or apologize for lying. Let's not ever forget you devoted a whole thread to your hate of obese people and still have f**king gall of an ignorant hypocrite to call other people racists or bigots or whatever else you want to make up about them.

    So excuse me for not giving one rotten cat cunt about what the f**K you think about me. You are one low life superficial scum bag who has shown zero integrity and zero honesty. In other words, you do not matter to me, dead or alive.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2015 4:53 PM GMT
    bobbobbob said
    You're hold the record for being the most prolific lying scumbag in RJ


    Who is the recorder here? You, who has been here a mere 6 months? Why not devote some of your archival trawling to the posts of your RJ conservative buddies? Or does your 'independence' not extend that far? With a couple of exceptions, RJ's conservative rump have shown a profligacy in lying that eclipses anything A_D may have done. From sock accounts to smear campaigns, their grubby little fingers are all over it.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3279

    May 07, 2015 5:30 PM GMT
    To force someone to do something they do not want to do is a strange type of slavery to me.

    I think the left does harm to gay rights by pushing this point.

    A businessperson would have to be stupid to refuse business. But we have a right to be stupid.

    Can a florist refuse to be a part of Charles Manson's funeral? Absolutely.

    Its a different situation if a restaurant with public doors open, you cannot refuse based on race or most other demographic.

    Granted the whole topic is highly nuanced.

    If a person came into a florist and bought some flowers, they cannot really discriminate if the doors are open to the public.

    However if there has to a be a contract, a future supply of business. One cannot force someone to go into a contract. The florist can simply say they are unavailable. Or they cannot offer the services they want or need. I would counsel any business, it is not a wise thing to give more information that is needed.

    To say " I will not go into a contract because you are gay" is likely to invite negative emotions back at your business.

    There is a particular Lexus dealership in Palm Springs that caters only to older patrons who seem to be easy sells. They gave to Prop 8. I have been there several times and get the runaround, or they give you a price above sticker. They are definitely homophobic.

    So I told all of my friends, gay and straight. Many report the same issue. After I helped a female friend buy her car at a dealership 40 miles east, The manager offered some special dealer perks to people who purchased from my area.
    That is the way the market will weed out stupid business practices. These court cases are a waste of money and heartache.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2015 6:05 PM GMT
    musclmed saidTo force someone to do something they do not want to do is a strange type of slavery to me
    odd; usually never hear discrimination also called slavery.
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    May 07, 2015 6:19 PM GMT
    ^^

    you can pretty much concoct some bullshit religious belief to justify almost anything
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2015 6:29 PM GMT
    pellaz said
    musclmed saidTo force someone to do something they do not want to do is a strange type of slavery to me
    odd; usually never hear discrimination also called slavery.


    Odd is right. He wouldn't last a week in Canada with reasoning of that caliber.

    So musclmed, what happens if you're out somewhere rural and you fall on something and pucture a lung. The local doctor refuses to treat you as it is, you claim, his right. The nearest medical help is 200 miles away but the people who found you won't do it (take you there) for the same reason.
    You die. The end.
    All is well in the world, right? Freedom to discriminate trumps all rights to life and all other freedoms. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    May 07, 2015 7:26 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    pellaz said
    musclmed saidTo force someone to do something they do not want to do is a strange type of slavery to me
    odd; usually never hear discrimination also called slavery.


    Odd is right. He wouldn't last a week in Canada with reasoning of that caliber.

    So musclmed, what happens if you're out somewhere rural and you fall on something and pucture a lung. The local doctor refuses to treat you as it is, you claim, his right. The nearest medical help is 200 miles away but the people who found you won't do it (take you there) for the same reason.
    You die. The end.
    All is well in the world, right? Freedom to discriminate trumps all rights to life and all other freedoms. icon_rolleyes.gif


    THAT is a bullshit analogy and you know it. It has nothing to do with what musclmed was saying.

    The move to compel friggin florists and bakeries to do things that (even under a pretense) they say are against their religious principles is a Pandora's box no one wants to open if they wise up and think past the ends of their noses. It will set an ugly precedent that could come back and potentially be used against gays. I sat "potentially" because I'm not going to sit back and analyze all the potential unforeseen consequences of fucking around with the 1st amendment. Instead, I'm going to stick up for the 1st amendment in all cases - even the ones I don't like - because the 1st amendment gives me and everyone of you more protections and freedom that are way more important than this silly idea of compelling shit-for-brains florists and bakeries to do things they don't want to do.

    I have true awe for Thomas Jefferson's genius in composing the one sentence that linked the free practice of religion- one of the oldest enemies of freedom of speech, freedom press and assembly together in a way where one cannot exist without the other. Fuck with one and your fuck with both.

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    Those words protect me from having any religion's beliefs, or traditions imposed on me against my will. They also prohibit me from imposing my religion's beliefs and traditions on others.

    Just as much as everyone else, I don't like the fact that there are assholes who don't want to do business with gays - but they have a perfect right to be assholes. I'm not defending them. I'm defending the rights of everyone that are at stake by fucking the rights of a few florists and bakeries.
  • Destinharbor

    Posts: 4433

    May 07, 2015 7:40 PM GMT
    musclmed saidTo force someone to do something they do not want to do is a strange type of slavery to me.

    I think the left does harm to gay rights by pushing this point.

    A businessperson would have to be stupid to refuse business. But we have a right to be stupid.

    Can a florist refuse to be a part of Charles Manson's funeral? Absolutely.

    Its a different situation if a restaurant with public doors open, you cannot refuse based on race or most other demographic.

    Granted the whole topic is highly nuanced.

    If a person came into a florist and bought some flowers, they cannot really discriminate if the doors are open to the public.

    However if there has to a be a contract, a future supply of business. One cannot force someone to go into a contract. The florist can simply say they are unavailable. Or they cannot offer the services they want or need. I would counsel any business, it is not a wise thing to give more information that is needed.

    To say " I will not go into a contract because you are gay" is likely to invite negative emotions back at your business.

    There is a particular Lexus dealership in Palm Springs that caters only to older patrons who seem to be easy sells. They gave to Prop 8. I have been there several times and get the runaround, or they give you a price above sticker. They are definitely homophobic.

    So I told all of my friends, gay and straight. Many report the same issue. After I helped a female friend buy her car at a dealership 40 miles east, The manager offered some special dealer perks to people who purchased from my area.
    That is the way the market will weed out stupid business practices. These court cases are a waste of money and heartache.

    I tend to agree with this. I think we're pushing a bit too hard on a subject that is pretty trivial. Sure, a hotel or restaurant of some other venue that is open to the public shouldn't be allowed to discriminate but why would any couple want to do business on their wedding day with a wedding service that is owned by such assholes. All we're doing is providing ammunition for the religious right and the crazies in the Republican Party. Let them die off or all move to Nebraska or hell, I'll give 'em Texas if they'll all just go away somewhere. We're winning. We shouldn't worry so much about something so inconsequential.

    And just ignore Bob3. He's crazy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2015 8:36 PM GMT

    It has everything to do with what musclmed said, bobobob, because I know something you don't. icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2015 8:45 PM GMT



    Enjoy bobobob.

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/02/19/doctor_refuses_to_treat_baby_of_lesbian_parents_because_they_re_gay.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2015 9:02 PM GMT


    Tell you what bobobob. You want freedom of expression to be OK in that manner etc? Fine. Enforce it. Make every business that wishes to discriminate in such a fashion post a large un-missable sign in their establishments declaring their points of discrimination. THEN let the market decide. I suspect, though this might work in some instances, that nevertheless you'll get the chick filet fiasco with bigots pouring their consumer money into the businesses in question.

    icon_lol.gif

    At least it will spare the poor gay suckers that walk into a business from being publicly embarrassed before others when they are denied service.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    May 07, 2015 9:11 PM GMT
    meninlove said


    Enjoy bobobob.

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/02/19/doctor_refuses_to_treat_baby_of_lesbian_parents_because_they_re_gay.html


    I'm familiar with Dr. Vesna Roi's stupidity and sure she already regrets her hypocrisy - but even doctors have a right to refuse to see patients. There was a gay guy here whose doctor refused to see him and he tried to make a big deal out of it and say it was homophobia. WRONG. He'd shown up drunk for a inpatient surgery.

    My own doctor refuses to see patients with certain forms of insurance (may have changed) I know she still will not take on new patients who smoke, or have drug habits UNLESS they go into treatment for those addictions. She even refuses to see patients with weight related problems UNLESS they get in programs to lose weight and actually begin to lose weight. I am proud she does all that! She has gone in with other doctors and begun a weight loss clinic that's free to most patients. Our county has one of the best addiction programs in the US and it's FREE.

    I've heard that in some states doctors refuse to see patients who smoke until they get on free state programs to stop smoking.

    I'm definitely not making excuses for Dr. Vesna Roi's stupidity. There's no excuse for it. I'm pointing out that doctors do not have to treat everyone who comes in their offices.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2015 9:18 PM GMT
    bobbobbob saidTHAT is a bullshit analogy and you know it.

    Bullshit, is it? Do you happen to know how Bessie Smith died?

  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    May 08, 2015 2:42 AM GMT

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    I just read to be sure. You might want to as well.



    Bessie Smith was taken to Clarksdale's G. T. Thomas Afro-American Hospital, where her right arm was amputated. She died that morning without regaining consciousness. After Smith's death, an often repeated but now discredited story emerged about the circumstances; namely, that she had died as a result of having been refused admission to a "whites only" hospital in Clarksdale. Jazz writer/producer John Hammond gave this account in an article in the November 1937 issue of Down Beat magazine. The circumstances of Smith's death and the rumor promoted by Hammond formed the basis for Edward Albee's 1959 one-act play The Death of Bessie Smith.[15]

    "The Bessie Smith ambulance would not have gone to a white hospital, you can forget that." Dr. Smith told Albertson. "Down in the Deep South cotton country, no ambulance driver, or white driver, would even have thought of putting a colored person off in a hospital for white folks."[16]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bessie_Smith

    But don't let eyewitnesses and facts get in the way of what you want to believe... just don't confuse what you want to believe as the truth just because you don't like the facts.

  • musclmed

    Posts: 3279

    May 08, 2015 6:35 AM GMT
    meninlove said
    pellaz said
    musclmed saidTo force someone to do something they do not want to do is a strange type of slavery to me
    odd; usually never hear discrimination also called slavery.


    Odd is right. He wouldn't last a week in Canada with reasoning of that caliber.

    So musclmed, what happens if you're out somewhere rural and you fall on something and pucture a lung. The local doctor refuses to treat you as it is, you claim, his right. The nearest medical help is 200 miles away but the people who found you won't do it (take you there) for the same reason.
    You die. The end.
    All is well in the world, right? Freedom to discriminate trumps all rights to life and all other freedoms. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Your hypothetical is invalid and for the most part medicine in the United States doesn't have this issue. In certain states its specifically ILLEGAL to discriminate in medical care. In addition it is drummed into medical students from the beginning.

    There are several reasons that medicine is not congruent with "business". For one emergency care cannot be refused.
    That is care in a emergency room. You cannot compel a local doctor to do anything. You cannot pull him out of bed, knock on his door and expect care.

    On a flight from NY to LA, a 1 week old premi newborn started turning blue when we reached cruising altitude. I gave assistance because I wanted to . Not because any law compelled me to. Things went well with the baby, about 2 hours later a drunk idiot from the back of the plane woke me up out of sleep and asked me "what does it mean if your knee clicks?" Lets just say I didnt answer.

    I CHOSE note to speak to him and discriminated. Because he was rude and over-jocular considering the prior events. If I was in a Emergency room I could not exercise the same discretion.

    Get the difference?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 08, 2015 2:07 PM GMT
    we are governed by laws, NOT people's varied belief systems. Fair to say you can extend a funky attitude to friends family and acquaintances but in a professional public environment we are back to the laws that govern: insurance, banks and statements of work in the public environment.

    there is a tiered scrutiny how discrimination is applied, its just that way. Never was equal representation for all.



    conservative or liberal, government has a huge bad side. As a citizen I for one want to be on the best side of the law. Not wanting to give this away because i am gay.
    -I dont want to become un married if i move to another state next door.
    -Never want to go to the back of the bus.
    -a citizen should not take issue if i show PDA to my husband
    -have access to public education w/o violence
    -it is not ok to get bashed or raped if you dress that way.

  • TroyAthlete

    Posts: 4269

    May 08, 2015 2:18 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    bobbobbob said
    It's about us Independents.

    Independent? You???

    lolololololol

    hahahahah


    An "independent" these days is a Republican who is embarrassed to be associated with the Republican brand, and given that Republicans can only win elections by running away from their party platform and governing like liberal RINOS -- who can blame them?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 08, 2015 2:25 PM GMT
    gay republicans seem able to ignore it but they are part of the registered independents
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    May 08, 2015 10:37 PM GMT
    pellaz saidgay republicans seem able to ignore it but they are part of the registered independents


    That's not really true and I can speak from knowing many gays in real life who are republicans to the core.

    Many gays identify as libertarians.
    Some of us non liberal gays identify as conservative.
    Some of us identify as independents.

    As far as "registered" independents that's determined at the state level for balloting purposes and not in all states.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 09, 2015 12:03 AM GMT
    I can speak from experience that many gays in Seattle are liberals since the glacier receded.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    May 09, 2015 12:17 AM GMT
    woodsmen saidI can speak from experience that many gays in Seattle are liberals since the glacier receded.


    That's about as relevant as me saying I can speak from experience that many gays here already have suntans.