Christian man forced to reproduce lesbian videos

[Kritish]

You're looking at it from the wrong perspective. It's not a law that says "take every job offer"

It's a law that says "no discrimination against race, gender, religion and sexual orientation"

If the Guy would have simply said "No we don't take the offer" all would be okay but nooo he had to be cocky and show them what a brave and moral christian he is, telling them " Your lifestyle goes against my believes and therefor I don't want you as costumers". Well, an idiot gets what he deserves so I have not a single shred of pity for him.

Agreed.

 

[Emrys]

Agreed.

Yeah I don't see what's so complicated about it. Like I said I'm discriminating against religious people on a daily basis even though it's technically prohibited by the law. It's all how you tell it to them.
If I did say" get out of my shop you christian nut or muslim terrorist" then it would be my own fault if the law cracks down on me but if I simply say "sorry can't do it search someone else" even though my motives are that I hate religious people and the true reason for me to decline is because I don't want to work for them everything is A Okay.

 

[Addendum]

You're looking at it from the wrong perspective. It's not a law that says "take every job offer"

It's a law that says "no discrimination against race, gender, religion and sexual orientation"

If the Guy would have simply said "No we don't take the offer" all would be okay but nooo he had to be cocky and show them what a brave and moral christian he is, telling them " Your lifestyle goes against my believes and therefor I don't want you as costumers". Well, an idiot gets what he deserves so I have not a single shred of pity for him.

Look it's quite easy, I don't like religious people, be it muslims or christians, so I don't do business with them but I don't run around telling them "I don't want to be employed by you because your religion goes against my values" I simply say" I'm sorry but I'm currently not avaiable to do your work please go to someone else."

I don't place any importance in so-called "sacred books" or the god-claim they proclaim, nor do I see a logical reason to believe in one.

However, if another person chooses to believe in that god-claim, I have no problem with that. I don't go around berating those who believe anyway.

I'd take my business elsewhere with no skin off my back if a faith-based business refused to have my business. If I used a faith-based company for my business purposes, I would at least find out more about the company, what they believe and submit my business with respect to their beliefs, even though I don't subscribe to it.

 

[Emrys]

I don't place any importance in so-called "sacred books" or the god-claim they proclaim, nor do I see a logical reason to believe in one.

However, if another person chooses to believe in that god-claim, I have no problem with that. I don't go around berating those who believe anyway.

I'd take my business elsewhere with no skin off my back if a faith-based business refused to have my business. If I used a faith-based company for my business purposes, I would at least find out more about the company, what they believe and submit my business with respect to their beliefs, even though I don't subscribe to it.

Then again you're not gay and lesbian, you're not the one who is under constant attack because you live your life in sin according to their believe. Such constant berrating wears you thin and one day you simply strike back.

I can understand the lesbians, on the other hand I also can understand the shop owner. The problem though is on both sides of the isle. The lesbians are at fault because they can't step down and just leave albeit with a grudge and the shop owner is at fault because he had to rub his value system in their face.

It's all a matter of Pride with both sides unable to overcome it. So the law steps in and since the law says "no discrimination against sexual orientation" the shop owner looses.

However My decision would have been to judge both guilty cause the lesbians by their action discriminate against the shop owners religion and the shop owner with his refusal discriminates against the lesbians sexual orientation.

In the end I would have fined the shop owner to donate money to a gay rights group and the lesbians to donate money to a faith based institution so both of them would be hit where it hurts and that's MY brand of justice.

 

[Addendum]

The shop owner did not rub his beliefs in their face. He said no, and offered an explanation.

It's not his fault that the lesbian got *****y about it, if she did.

 

[Harlekin]

So what you're basically saying is that he was okay to discriminate against them as long as he didn't admit to it? That's just covering up the problem. "You're free to refuse them, just don't tell 'em why."

Also, your analogy of animal sacrifice doesn't really hold up. The shop owner isn't killing a living being when he refuses to duplicate a pro-gay video. In the law there is a certain hierarchy because certain laws will stand on opposite sides of each other. In a very simplistic version:

- Don't kill
- Freedom of religion
- Don't discriminate

People have their freedom of religion as long as they don't overstep their boundaries. Refusing a job offer based on personal beliefs isn't really crossing any bounds, and I'm even surprised that you guys are even advocating veiled discrimination.

 

[logansoldcigar]

So what you're basically saying is that he was okay to discriminate against them as long as he didn't admit to it? That's just covering up the problem. "You're free to refuse them, just don't tell 'em why."

Also, your analogy of animal sacrifice doesn't really hold up. The shop owner isn't killing a living being when he refuses to duplicate a pro-gay video. In the law there is a certain hierarchy because certain laws will stand on opposite sides of each other. In a very simplistic version:

- Don't kill
- Freedom of religion
- Don't discriminate

People have their freedom of religion as long as they don't overstep their boundaries. Refusing a job offer based on personal beliefs isn't really crossing any bounds, and I'm even surprised that you guys are even advocating veiled discrimination.

i think you are misunderstanding. The way I see it, what people are saying is, not that its ok to be a bigot if you dont say owt about it, but if he hadnt given his reason for why he was turning the work down, he wouldnt be in the crap he is in now. As it is, he has the perfect right to be a bigot, whether faith based or not. Our job as a civilised society is to
a)try to show him that he is wrong
b) have laws that promote equality between the races and the genders and the sexual orientations. effectively say : ok, you wanna be a bigot, be one. but you cant actively promote bigotry.

as i said earlier, if we try to control what people think and try to force them to think how we do, it only entrenches what they believe (how manytimes have I seen affirmative action/positive discrimination used as an argument for no anti discrimination legislation, simply because AA/PD is discriminatory in its self)

as for the animal sacrfices, the point of those was to show that the clause in the US constitution allowing freedom of religion and free exercise thereof is limited: in reality its freedom of religion and free exercise thereof as long as its in the limits that we apply.we already have anti discrimination legislation covering color and people cant hide behind faith on that. therefore, your three points should actually read:

- Don't kill
- Don't discriminate against anyone on our list, although we may add to it later
- Freedom of religion as long as it doesnt contradict what we have written above, and as long as it doesnt break any existing laws


NB: When i say we, i dont necessarily mean the USA, i mean society in general. im not in the USA, but its info ive picked up on these boards

 

[Harlekin]

i think you are misunderstanding. The way I see it, what people are saying is, not that its ok to be a bigot if you dont say owt about it, but if he hadnt given his reason for why he was turning the work down, he wouldnt be in the crap he is in now. As it is, he has the perfect right to be a bigot, whether faith based or not. Our job as a civilised society is to
a)try to show him that he is wrong
b) have laws that promote equality between the races and the genders and the sexual orientations. effectively say : ok, you wanna be a bigot, be one. but you cant actively promote bigotry.

Well, we obviously need to show him the error of his ways, but by forcing him to duplicate pro-gay videos that isn't really going to happen.

as i said earlier, if we try to control what people think and try to force them to think how we do, it only entrenches what they believe (how manytimes have I seen affirmative action/positive discrimination used as an argument for no anti discrimination legislation, simply because AA/PD is discriminatory in its self)

Exactly.

as for the animal sacrfices, the point of those was to show that the clause in the US constitution allowing freedom of religion and free exercise thereof is limited: in reality its freedom of religion and free exercise thereof as long as its in the limits that we apply.we already have anti discrimination legislation covering color and people cant hide behind faith on that. therefore, your three points should actually read:

- Don't kill
- Don't discriminate against anyone on our list, although we may add to it later
- Freedom of religion as long as it doesnt contradict what we have written above, and as long as it doesnt break any existing laws

Well, in a perfect society we wouldn't need to make that hierarchy. It's all about the limits that we apply. I think that freedom of religion to a certain extent should be above anti-discrimination. Coming back to the veiled discrimination bit, I'd rather have the real reason than some bull**** excuse to avoid trouble with the law. Also, this would mean forcing churches to accept woman priests etc. (which I don't think should happen).

NB: When i say we, i dont necessarily mean the USA, i mean society in general. im not in the USA, but its info ive picked up on these boards

I'm not in the USA either.

 

[pyromaniac]

I'll just move over to the other side for a second and say that this fellow (Bono) is a jerk. You know what though, he has that right to do so. My opinion is and I think it's the intentions of the Founding Fathers (I will believe this until I'm proven wrong) is that Americans have the right to be rude or mean as long as they don't hurt anyone else physically.

Heard of the sticks and bones analogy?

That really explains the root of America, actually.