Author Topic: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?  (Read 51838 times)

JLee

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4337
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1000 on: February 10, 2018, 11:24:17 AM »
but also because he is taking an action which imposes his religious beliefs on them.

It always amazes me that this very basic and obvious concept escapes the people defending this baker, Hobby Lobby, etc. Those entities are the ones violating people's rights by forcing their world view onto others. Not sure why that's so hard to understand.

Because we don't agree that refusing economic service to someone is equivalent to forcing your worldview on someone. Forcing your view on someone means someone is knocking on your door Sunday morning and dragging you into a Church service.

There's also no "right to economic service" in the Constitution, and the federal government's ability to ban discrimination should be limited to businesses engaged in interstate commerce, which we think should be interpreted narrowly. Selling cakes to local weddings cannot reasonably be considered interstate commerce. States are free to set their own public accommodation laws, but more libertarian types are not going to agree with said laws because it's the government interfering with private business. That businesses cannot set up without the government's permission makes no more sense to libertarian-inclined individuals than requiring government permission to set up your own church, and are equally offensive.

More moderate libertarian types, like myself, or the guys at Marginal Revolution, or probably the guys at EconLog, can absolutely be horrified that blacks were treated as second-class citizens, and think this should be prevented even if those kinda fucks up parts of the Constitution. Blacks are a huge chunk of the population across a huge geographic area, and their treatment was really, really bad. Homosexuals in America are a substantially smaller portion and don't face anything like the discrimination blacks faced, outside of certain communities, and the inability to get a wedding cake is pretty small potatoes.

That we can only open businesses with the permission of government is, you know, realistically true. It's also realistically true that we only have the right to protest and the right to free speech and the right to attend our own churches because the government lets us. There's nothing stopping them from tank-rolling protestors and dropping nukes on particularly stubborn cities like San Francisco. History is full of governments mandating attendance in certain churches and closing up illegal churches. That doesn't change what WE think are inalienable human rights, the violation of which amounts to a violation of human dignity.

Obviously, arguments that it is Current Year aren't really convincing either.

Which is exactly what Colorado has done in this case, yes?

Fireball

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 176
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1001 on: February 10, 2018, 11:39:18 AM »
see Trump. No one refused to sell him a wedding cake because he cheated on his prior wives).

This is the part about the baker's defense that I always had an issue with.  You previously committed adultery? You get a cake. This is your 2nd marriage? You get a cake. You just lied about something? You get a cake.  You guys had sex before marriage? You get a cake. Your gay? I must stand on my principles and no cake for you. Seems it's not all sin the baker hated. Just the one.

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2872
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1002 on: February 10, 2018, 12:21:12 PM »
More moderate libertarian types, like myself, or the guys at Marginal Revolution, or probably the guys at EconLog, can absolutely be horrified that blacks were treated as second-class citizens, and think this should be prevented even if those kinda fucks up parts of the Constitution. Blacks are a huge chunk of the population across a huge geographic area, and their treatment was really, really bad. Homosexuals in America are a substantially smaller portion and don't face anything like the discrimination blacks faced, outside of certain communities, and the inability to get a wedding cake is pretty small potatoes.

This fascinates me. Only minorities who have achieved a certain numerical size deserve protection against discrimination?  Really?  What percentage of the population does a minority have to reach to be protected?

Also, lets not get into "the discrimination against me is worse than the discrimination against you", hmmm?   If the discriminatory treatment fails the legal standard (even for gays, even for cake) it becomes irrelevant that there is a different level of discrimination against someone else.  Assault is not legal just because it's not murder.
Be frugal and industrious, and you will be free (Ben Franklin)

jrhampt

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1017
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Connecticut
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1003 on: February 10, 2018, 01:33:41 PM »
Also, the argument that gays aren’t badly discriminated against is forgetting Matthew Shepard.  There are many societies (ours included) that KILL gay people for being gay.

WhiteTrashCash

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1052
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1004 on: February 10, 2018, 02:07:53 PM »
Also, the argument that gays aren’t badly discriminated against is forgetting Matthew Shepard.  There are many societies (ours included) that KILL gay people for being gay.

Yeah, gays face a lot of discrimination throughout the world and I just read that Bermuda recently outlawed gay marriage after it had been legal for a while. Things are going backward for gay rights right now and in a lot of places it's still a death sentence to be homosexual. I was horrified by the ISIS videos where they were hurling gays to their deaths off the top of buildings.

A Definite Beta Guy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 576
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1005 on: February 10, 2018, 03:57:25 PM »
but also because he is taking an action which imposes his religious beliefs on them.

It always amazes me that this very basic and obvious concept escapes the people defending this baker, Hobby Lobby, etc. Those entities are the ones violating people's rights by forcing their world view onto others. Not sure why that's so hard to understand.

Because we don't agree that refusing economic service to someone is equivalent to forcing your worldview on someone. Forcing your view on someone means someone is knocking on your door Sunday morning and dragging you into a Church service.

There's also no "right to economic service" in the Constitution, and the federal government's ability to ban discrimination should be limited to businesses engaged in interstate commerce, which we think should be interpreted narrowly. Selling cakes to local weddings cannot reasonably be considered interstate commerce. States are free to set their own public accommodation laws, but more libertarian types are not going to agree with said laws because it's the government interfering with private business. That businesses cannot set up without the government's permission makes no more sense to libertarian-inclined individuals than requiring government permission to set up your own church, and are equally offensive.

More moderate libertarian types, like myself, or the guys at Marginal Revolution, or probably the guys at EconLog, can absolutely be horrified that blacks were treated as second-class citizens, and think this should be prevented even if those kinda fucks up parts of the Constitution. Blacks are a huge chunk of the population across a huge geographic area, and their treatment was really, really bad. Homosexuals in America are a substantially smaller portion and don't face anything like the discrimination blacks faced, outside of certain communities, and the inability to get a wedding cake is pretty small potatoes.

That we can only open businesses with the permission of government is, you know, realistically true. It's also realistically true that we only have the right to protest and the right to free speech and the right to attend our own churches because the government lets us. There's nothing stopping them from tank-rolling protestors and dropping nukes on particularly stubborn cities like San Francisco. History is full of governments mandating attendance in certain churches and closing up illegal churches. That doesn't change what WE think are inalienable human rights, the violation of which amounts to a violation of human dignity.

Obviously, arguments that it is Current Year aren't really convincing either.

I'm really trying to understand the other side of this argument.  Maybe you can answer my questions from before?

So, I'm kind of on the fence about this topic and I've been meaning to ask a question of someone that takes your position.  Would it be okay, in your view, for me to start a business and then deny my services to someone because of their religion?  How about because of their age?  Or race/sex?  How far does this freedom of association go?  I just feel like if the guy who wouldn't bake a cake for a gay couple walked into my store and was turned away due to his religion he would probably not be okay with it.

Based on what you wrote though, it seems to me like your saying that those with a conservative/libertarian worldview think that anti-discrimination laws are some kind of necessary evil.  That they are not constitutionally sound, but that they are required for certain real-life scenarios that go beyond a certain tipping point like what happened with racial discrimination.  Am I understanding that correctly?

It depends on who you are talking to and what the specific issue is. People don't really think out the specifics of these situations until actual scenarios come up. In general, few conservatives are going to agree that you should be allowed to discriminate on the basis of religion, sex, race, or any of the traditional protected classes. Even at the time of the Civil Rights Act, the VAST majority of Republicans voted for the bill....Goldwater may have carried the GOP primary, but his support was damned weak and he ended up getting blown out practically everywhere.

Your hardcore Ron Swansons won't agree with that, because they are even further afield than Goldwater.

I'd say most of the people who think this out wouldn't think the Civil Rights Act is constitutionally unsound (except maybe Clarence Thomas), but that it opens up constitutionally murky waters. At the state level, I think most conservatives would be on board with banning discrimination of the traditional protected classes, because there is no question states have the ability to regulate such things. Again, your Ron Swanson types will disagree, but they are a substantial minority.

Your median conservative position would probably be like Indiana's religious freedom law or the recent Hobby Lobby case or the Amerindian peyote laws, which is that a US law cannot impose an undue burden on someone's religious practices, even if it is facially neutral and even if you are engaged in commerce. Blah blah strict scrutiny, etc.

Basically people just have a knee-jerk reaction that someone shouldn't be compelled to serve a gay wedding. I don't know the breakdown of the people who think companies should be allowed to fire gay workers, but it didn't raise the firestorm in the conservative press like the gay wedding cake did, so I assume they feel much, much less strongly about that.

Quote


This fascinates me. Only minorities who have achieved a certain numerical size deserve protection against discrimination?  Really?  What percentage of the population does a minority have to reach to be protected?

Also, lets not get into "the discrimination against me is worse than the discrimination against you", hmmm?   If the discriminatory treatment fails the legal standard (even for gays, even for cake) it becomes irrelevant that there is a different level of discrimination against someone else.  Assault is not legal just because it's not murder.
The argument is that the anti-discrimination laws are overly broad, so your second point is not really relevant.

As for the first, the Civil Rights Era was a really big deal. It involved huge contentious divisions, massive riots, marching the army into the South (again), and opening the door to all sorts of federal overexpansion. If you're going to go through all that, it has to be for a good reason.

Quote
Also, the argument that gays aren’t badly discriminated against is forgetting Matthew Shepard.  There are many societies (ours included) that KILL gay people for being gay.
Come on. Who is really saying we should be killing gay people? Westboro? Those guys should've given a short rope from a tall tree and left to swing until the sun went down.

Gays face some additional discrimination. The discrimination they face is NOTHING like blacks faced anywhere in the US in the 1960s, and especially nothing like the Jim Crow system. It was rightly considered one of the greatest moral failings about the US, and people really wanted it to be corrected. LGBTs aren't even the group with the most hate crimes against them today: Jews are.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime#United_States

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2872
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1006 on: February 10, 2018, 05:38:56 PM »

This fascinates me. Only minorities who have achieved a certain numerical size deserve protection against discrimination?  Really?  What percentage of the population does a minority have to reach to be protected?

Also, lets not get into "the discrimination against me is worse than the discrimination against you", hmmm?   If the discriminatory treatment fails the legal standard (even for gays, even for cake) it becomes irrelevant that there is a different level of discrimination against someone else.  Assault is not legal just because it's not murder.
The argument is that the anti-discrimination laws are overly broad, so your second point is not really relevant.

As for the first, the Civil Rights Era was a really big deal. It involved huge contentious divisions, massive riots, marching the army into the South (again), and opening the door to all sorts of federal overexpansion. If you're going to go through all that, it has to be for a good reason.

You are trying to change your argument.  You quite clearly based your earlier argument that Blacks deserve protection against discrimination whereas gays don't on 1) the size of the minority and 2) the level of discrimination.  Here's your quote -

. Blacks are a huge chunk of the population across a huge geographic area, and their treatment was really, really bad. Homosexuals in America are a substantially smaller portion and don't face anything like the discrimination blacks faced, outside of certain communities, and the inability to get a wedding cake is pretty small potatoes.

You are now making the argument that "anti-discrimination laws are overly broad".  You appear to have abandoned the proposition that whether a minority deserves protection depends in principle on the size of that minority.  (This is good: would Blacks have not deserved protection if they were only 1% of the population?)  You also appear to have abandoned to a certain extent the notion that protection depends on the scale of the harm done, as you seem to be saying that protection does not differ depending on whether the harm is assault or murder.  Your remaining argument appears to be not one of principle (whether protecting against discrimination is a good thing or not) but that the backlash against providing that protection may mean that the harm caused is greater than the benefit.

Really?  You think that the chance of toddler tantrums by straight white people mean that non-white, non-straight people should not have the protection of the law against discrimination?  That's your argument?    Nothing to do with principle?  Nothing to do with what's right?  Just: the straight white people are going to unlawfully resist democratic laws enacted to protect historically and currrently oppressed people so lets not bother enacting those laws?
Be frugal and industrious, and you will be free (Ben Franklin)

shenlong55

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 181
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Kentucky
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1007 on: February 10, 2018, 05:55:45 PM »
but also because he is taking an action which imposes his religious beliefs on them.

It always amazes me that this very basic and obvious concept escapes the people defending this baker, Hobby Lobby, etc. Those entities are the ones violating people's rights by forcing their world view onto others. Not sure why that's so hard to understand.

Because we don't agree that refusing economic service to someone is equivalent to forcing your worldview on someone. Forcing your view on someone means someone is knocking on your door Sunday morning and dragging you into a Church service.

There's also no "right to economic service" in the Constitution, and the federal government's ability to ban discrimination should be limited to businesses engaged in interstate commerce, which we think should be interpreted narrowly. Selling cakes to local weddings cannot reasonably be considered interstate commerce. States are free to set their own public accommodation laws, but more libertarian types are not going to agree with said laws because it's the government interfering with private business. That businesses cannot set up without the government's permission makes no more sense to libertarian-inclined individuals than requiring government permission to set up your own church, and are equally offensive.

More moderate libertarian types, like myself, or the guys at Marginal Revolution, or probably the guys at EconLog, can absolutely be horrified that blacks were treated as second-class citizens, and think this should be prevented even if those kinda fucks up parts of the Constitution. Blacks are a huge chunk of the population across a huge geographic area, and their treatment was really, really bad. Homosexuals in America are a substantially smaller portion and don't face anything like the discrimination blacks faced, outside of certain communities, and the inability to get a wedding cake is pretty small potatoes.

That we can only open businesses with the permission of government is, you know, realistically true. It's also realistically true that we only have the right to protest and the right to free speech and the right to attend our own churches because the government lets us. There's nothing stopping them from tank-rolling protestors and dropping nukes on particularly stubborn cities like San Francisco. History is full of governments mandating attendance in certain churches and closing up illegal churches. That doesn't change what WE think are inalienable human rights, the violation of which amounts to a violation of human dignity.

Obviously, arguments that it is Current Year aren't really convincing either.

I'm really trying to understand the other side of this argument.  Maybe you can answer my questions from before?

So, I'm kind of on the fence about this topic and I've been meaning to ask a question of someone that takes your position.  Would it be okay, in your view, for me to start a business and then deny my services to someone because of their religion?  How about because of their age?  Or race/sex?  How far does this freedom of association go?  I just feel like if the guy who wouldn't bake a cake for a gay couple walked into my store and was turned away due to his religion he would probably not be okay with it.

Based on what you wrote though, it seems to me like your saying that those with a conservative/libertarian worldview think that anti-discrimination laws are some kind of necessary evil.  That they are not constitutionally sound, but that they are required for certain real-life scenarios that go beyond a certain tipping point like what happened with racial discrimination.  Am I understanding that correctly?

It depends on who you are talking to and what the specific issue is. People don't really think out the specifics of these situations until actual scenarios come up. In general, few conservatives are going to agree that you should be allowed to discriminate on the basis of religion, sex, race, or any of the traditional protected classes. Even at the time of the Civil Rights Act, the VAST majority of Republicans voted for the bill....Goldwater may have carried the GOP primary, but his support was damned weak and he ended up getting blown out practically everywhere.

Your hardcore Ron Swansons won't agree with that, because they are even further afield than Goldwater.

I'd say most of the people who think this out wouldn't think the Civil Rights Act is constitutionally unsound (except maybe Clarence Thomas), but that it opens up constitutionally murky waters. At the state level, I think most conservatives would be on board with banning discrimination of the traditional protected classes, because there is no question states have the ability to regulate such things. Again, your Ron Swanson types will disagree, but they are a substantial minority.

Your median conservative position would probably be like Indiana's religious freedom law or the recent Hobby Lobby case or the Amerindian peyote laws, which is that a US law cannot impose an undue burden on someone's religious practices, even if it is facially neutral and even if you are engaged in commerce. Blah blah strict scrutiny, etc.

Basically people just have a knee-jerk reaction that someone shouldn't be compelled to serve a gay wedding. I don't know the breakdown of the people who think companies should be allowed to fire gay workers, but it didn't raise the firestorm in the conservative press like the gay wedding cake did, so I assume they feel much, much less strongly about that.

Quote


This fascinates me. Only minorities who have achieved a certain numerical size deserve protection against discrimination?  Really?  What percentage of the population does a minority have to reach to be protected?

Also, lets not get into "the discrimination against me is worse than the discrimination against you", hmmm?   If the discriminatory treatment fails the legal standard (even for gays, even for cake) it becomes irrelevant that there is a different level of discrimination against someone else.  Assault is not legal just because it's not murder.
The argument is that the anti-discrimination laws are overly broad, so your second point is not really relevant.

As for the first, the Civil Rights Era was a really big deal. It involved huge contentious divisions, massive riots, marching the army into the South (again), and opening the door to all sorts of federal overexpansion. If you're going to go through all that, it has to be for a good reason.

Quote
Also, the argument that gays aren’t badly discriminated against is forgetting Matthew Shepard.  There are many societies (ours included) that KILL gay people for being gay.
Come on. Who is really saying we should be killing gay people? Westboro? Those guys should've given a short rope from a tall tree and left to swing until the sun went down.

Gays face some additional discrimination. The discrimination they face is NOTHING like blacks faced anywhere in the US in the 1960s, and especially nothing like the Jim Crow system. It was rightly considered one of the greatest moral failings about the US, and people really wanted it to be corrected. LGBTs aren't even the group with the most hate crimes against them today: Jews are.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime#United_States

Well, that didn't clear it up much but thank you for trying!  It just seems like a terribly inconsistent thought pattern to me. If I'm going to consider it okay to compel a baker to make a Christian wedding cake through the use of force then I'm not sure why I would consider it wrong to compel a baker to make a gay wedding cake through the use of force.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2018, 06:15:15 PM by shenlong55 »

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2723
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1008 on: February 11, 2018, 07:51:20 AM »
but also because he is taking an action which imposes his religious beliefs on them.

It always amazes me that this very basic and obvious concept escapes the people defending this baker, Hobby Lobby, etc. Those entities are the ones violating people's rights by forcing their world view onto others. Not sure why that's so hard to understand.

Because we don't agree that refusing economic service to someone is equivalent to forcing your worldview on someone. Forcing your view on someone means someone is knocking on your door Sunday morning and dragging you into a Church service.

There's also no "right to economic service" in the Constitution, and the federal government's ability to ban discrimination should be limited to businesses engaged in interstate commerce, which we think should be interpreted narrowly. Selling cakes to local weddings cannot reasonably be considered interstate commerce. States are free to set their own public accommodation laws, but more libertarian types are not going to agree with said laws because it's the government interfering with private business. That businesses cannot set up without the government's permission makes no more sense to libertarian-inclined individuals than requiring government permission to set up your own church, and are equally offensive.

More moderate libertarian types, like myself, or the guys at Marginal Revolution, or probably the guys at EconLog, can absolutely be horrified that blacks were treated as second-class citizens, and think this should be prevented even if those kinda fucks up parts of the Constitution. Blacks are a huge chunk of the population across a huge geographic area, and their treatment was really, really bad. Homosexuals in America are a substantially smaller portion and don't face anything like the discrimination blacks faced, outside of certain communities, and the inability to get a wedding cake is pretty small potatoes.

That we can only open businesses with the permission of government is, you know, realistically true. It's also realistically true that we only have the right to protest and the right to free speech and the right to attend our own churches because the government lets us. There's nothing stopping them from tank-rolling protestors and dropping nukes on particularly stubborn cities like San Francisco. History is full of governments mandating attendance in certain churches and closing up illegal churches. That doesn't change what WE think are inalienable human rights, the violation of which amounts to a violation of human dignity.

Obviously, arguments that it is Current Year aren't really convincing either.

I'm really trying to understand the other side of this argument.  Maybe you can answer my questions from before?

So, I'm kind of on the fence about this topic and I've been meaning to ask a question of someone that takes your position.  Would it be okay, in your view, for me to start a business and then deny my services to someone because of their religion?  How about because of their age?  Or race/sex?  How far does this freedom of association go?  I just feel like if the guy who wouldn't bake a cake for a gay couple walked into my store and was turned away due to his religion he would probably not be okay with it.

Based on what you wrote though, it seems to me like your saying that those with a conservative/libertarian worldview think that anti-discrimination laws are some kind of necessary evil.  That they are not constitutionally sound, but that they are required for certain real-life scenarios that go beyond a certain tipping point like what happened with racial discrimination.  Am I understanding that correctly?

It depends on who you are talking to and what the specific issue is. People don't really think out the specifics of these situations until actual scenarios come up. In general, few conservatives are going to agree that you should be allowed to discriminate on the basis of religion, sex, race, or any of the traditional protected classes. Even at the time of the Civil Rights Act, the VAST majority of Republicans voted for the bill....Goldwater may have carried the GOP primary, but his support was damned weak and he ended up getting blown out practically everywhere.

Your hardcore Ron Swansons won't agree with that, because they are even further afield than Goldwater.

I'd say most of the people who think this out wouldn't think the Civil Rights Act is constitutionally unsound (except maybe Clarence Thomas), but that it opens up constitutionally murky waters. At the state level, I think most conservatives would be on board with banning discrimination of the traditional protected classes, because there is no question states have the ability to regulate such things. Again, your Ron Swanson types will disagree, but they are a substantial minority.

Your median conservative position would probably be like Indiana's religious freedom law or the recent Hobby Lobby case or the Amerindian peyote laws, which is that a US law cannot impose an undue burden on someone's religious practices, even if it is facially neutral and even if you are engaged in commerce. Blah blah strict scrutiny, etc.

Basically people just have a knee-jerk reaction that someone shouldn't be compelled to serve a gay wedding. I don't know the breakdown of the people who think companies should be allowed to fire gay workers, but it didn't raise the firestorm in the conservative press like the gay wedding cake did, so I assume they feel much, much less strongly about that.

Quote


This fascinates me. Only minorities who have achieved a certain numerical size deserve protection against discrimination?  Really?  What percentage of the population does a minority have to reach to be protected?

Also, lets not get into "the discrimination against me is worse than the discrimination against you", hmmm?   If the discriminatory treatment fails the legal standard (even for gays, even for cake) it becomes irrelevant that there is a different level of discrimination against someone else.  Assault is not legal just because it's not murder.
The argument is that the anti-discrimination laws are overly broad, so your second point is not really relevant.

As for the first, the Civil Rights Era was a really big deal. It involved huge contentious divisions, massive riots, marching the army into the South (again), and opening the door to all sorts of federal overexpansion. If you're going to go through all that, it has to be for a good reason.

Quote
Also, the argument that gays aren’t badly discriminated against is forgetting Matthew Shepard.  There are many societies (ours included) that KILL gay people for being gay.
Come on. Who is really saying we should be killing gay people? Westboro? Those guys should've given a short rope from a tall tree and left to swing until the sun went down.

Gays face some additional discrimination. The discrimination they face is NOTHING like blacks faced anywhere in the US in the 1960s, and especially nothing like the Jim Crow system. It was rightly considered one of the greatest moral failings about the US, and people really wanted it to be corrected. LGBTs aren't even the group with the most hate crimes against them today: Jews are.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime#United_States

So, this dude’s totally okay, right? I mean, it’s just food. They can obviously just go somewhere else.

http://myfox8.com/2014/02/07/oklahoma-restaurant-owners-says-he-wont-serve-gay-or-black-customers/
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

MDM

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7551
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1009 on: February 11, 2018, 09:36:56 AM »
So, this dude’s totally okay, right? I mean, it’s just food. They can obviously just go somewhere else.

http://myfox8.com/2014/02/07/oklahoma-restaurant-owners-says-he-wont-serve-gay-or-black-customers/
Appears that was four years ago.  Any updates?

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2723
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1010 on: February 11, 2018, 09:48:39 AM »
So, this dude’s totally okay, right? I mean, it’s just food. They can obviously just go somewhere else.

http://myfox8.com/2014/02/07/oklahoma-restaurant-owners-says-he-wont-serve-gay-or-black-customers/
Appears that was four years ago.  Any updates?

My question was about whether this is okay. Because the arguments presented above by a few people suggest that it is.
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

TexasRunner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 605
  • Location: Somewhere in Tejas
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1011 on: February 11, 2018, 10:24:32 AM »
So after 19 pages... did anyone regret voting Republican?  I'm sure reading the entirety of this thread is about as healthy as swimming in toxic sludge.

There were a few, yeah.

Here was my response, click the blue link just above

And a very relevant post elsewhere:

As a progressive I HATE it when my own peers just throw the racist accusation out there during debates and arguments with people who disagree with them. It is usually just a sly, incredibly unfair assault on the person’s character masquerading as progressive enlightenment. A way to show off the progressive’s moral and intellectual superiority while also appearing oh so openminded. The accused cannot defend themselves in anyway without digging themselves deeper into the racist hole/argument. Not only is this a cop out in my opinion on the part of the progressive who is using a firebomb to shut down conversation, but if it is thrown by another white person, it is also a pathetic admission of how little that person understands racism and how it works (because they too are also racist to some extent). It's the pot calling the kettle black and then smugly patting themselves on the back about it. Not cool and totally not productive at all.

Thank you!  :)



I am not at all surprised at the strength of his vote.  Many middle class people are very angry about what has happened to them over the last 10 years.  The "last chance for America" pitch hits home.  And Hilary is widely hated. I was surprised at all the people I know that don't really care about character, they just want things "fixed."  They are voting for Trump, no matter what.

What really did happen to them over the last 10 years?  I have been extremely isolated from "real world" because I moved to Northern VA and Washington DC 15 years ago, and have had very little domestic travel in that time.  I haven't witnessed first hand any of the hardships that I read about in the news.  In 2008, there were still lines around the block waiting to get the latest iPhone and to get seated at restaurants and steak houses.  Today, there are lines of people every night waiting to get into the hottest $250/plate restaurants.  Every. Night. 

I've been witnessing vast amounts of wealth, massive spending, and rampant consumerism.  I know that I've isolated myself and I'm on a somewhat low-news diet, so can someone please tell me briefly, what is really happening out there to the average American who is doing the right things (not overspending, etc).  Is it my location alone that has allowed me to get through these tough times?  Or is it that I see a downturn and change my spending accordingly?  Even the people who claim to be affected, their gripes tend to be along the lines of "we're not gaining on our neighbors" rather than experiencing true hardship.  They still have cable, coffee, iphones, cars, etc.  But they may lose their houses because they won't compromise on the daily things. 

When you are removed from someone else's reality, you just lose perspective, and I think that has happened to me.

Getting back to the original topic by BlueHouse- in my area of Texas I have two very distinct views.

Some background:  My mom has a Master's in Accounting, my Dad has a Bachelor's in mathmatics.  My brother has his Master's and I am working on mine.  Everybody has Bachelor's degrees.  Because of this, I get to see into the world of the salary class.  My parents probably pull in 150-190k combined.  The recession definitely slowed things down for them (dad is in furniture business, mom is CPA for a medium privately-held corp) but things picked back up by 2010 or so- simply not to the extent of 2000-2008.  I also work in manufacturing for a metal building company.  I would say 75% of the people I work with are HS diploma holding, the other 25% are bachelor’s or beyond, about 55% white and 40% Hispanic.  This has given me a view into the wage class (that I am a part of) on a scale that I was not raised in and did not understand.  So there is where I am coming from.

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

The lump summary of the ‘mindset’ is that international trade has DESTROYED wage class jobs.  INCLUDING AGRICULTURE, MANUFACTURING AND RAW MATERIALS.  See this link for the rise in imported goods of all types: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.IMP.GNFS.ZS?end=2015&locations=US&start=1980.
Now compare this with the percentages that industry (IE the creation of things which is predominately higher paying wage class jobs) has shrunk.  http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NV.IND.TOTL.ZS?locations=US&view=chart

In other words, things were not going well for a while (1980 onward) but when 2008 hit, it was the stark event that overstressed the system.  The recession shut shit down.  A lot of it permanently.  So often I hear on this forum that it is because of “AI” or “automation of existing jobs” but I call bullshit.  There is no automation (yet) of welding together a column, putting up a building, cutting down a tree or the complete assembling of most products.  Lets be brutally honest here- what is being blamed on automation is actually the result of taking jobs that paid well in the US and moving them overseas where companies can pay half (or less) per 'widget'.  There is no “efficiency” or “automation” in that. 

Now this is possible because the US has shitty trade deals (Yes, they are in fact shitty) that were made so that the US could get its latest iCrap at a lower price.  Leftists are now concerned with a “Trade War” and “Nationalism” hurting the economy…  Anybody notice how the USA stocks fared against the foreign markets?  They were hurt (not really slammed) and we had semi-large gains.  With the financial savvy on this forum, that ought to explain to you that The Donald’s protectionist policies are actually going to be GREAT for American businesses and companies that no longer have to compete with illegal foreign activities (see: Chinese steel manufacturing subsidies).   

Take a look at Reebok, who is a solely domestic company.  They are EXCITED for their business opportunities since they now have access to a market that won’t have to compete with non-free trade foreign goods. 

As an example:  China’s focus is on keeping people employed.  They, as a society, have lowered their standard of living in order to subsidize higher employment than the market requires (Steel example here: http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-steelmakers-seek-antidumping-action-against-china-other-countries-1433353218, the steelmakers won this suit a few months ago and the US is now holding higher tariffs against Chinese steel).  As such, the goals of Chinese goods is not aligned with Reebok and they share the same market with differing goals (Reebok’s being profit/chinese being societal employment satisfaction).  This is one small example but it is exemplified on a much larger scale across those three sectors: Agricultural, Manufacturing and Raw Goods. 

Those three sectors represented 43.9% of the GPD in 1981 but 19% of the GDP in 2011HOW CAN THE LEFT (and the right for that matter) NOT UNDERSTAND HOW BIG A DEAL THAT ACTUALLY IS??? (Source with real numbers and not a lame article: http://www.bea.gov/industry/gdpbyind_data.htm)

Yes, their jobs are gone or leaving…  But instead of being replaced with automation, which would result in a neutral effect because it would mean fewer jobs with higher pay, they were outsourced and now automation looms on the horizon- without having the jobs be in the original communities.  As such, the “deplorables” see the left bragging about unemployment being at 5% and they scoff- because they know that number doesn’t reflect the timeouts and the people who gave up trying (See the level of labor force / population compared to the unemployment).  They see the GDP of their communities shrinking to nothing while being outsourced or sent overseas.  They see all the attention (and state-level spending) being directed at a few population centers in the state and not evenly. 

That is what “really did happen to them over the last 10 30 years?” and they are PISSED OFF about it.

In my opinion, albeit not that valuable, the best thing the left and the whole nation can do now is (1) get these jobs back by forcing companies to employ in our market in order to sell to our market before automation fully kicks in, (2) quit calling half the country “Deplorables” and “racists” and “bigots”, (3) Quit forcing ideals on people (dare I bring up the bakery incident?), And (4) please START LISTENING to those other side.  They are willing to listen to you (except for the 0.1% that is the noisiest) but after being neglected for so long they need to see that you are willing to reach out and listen to them.



TlDr:  Outsourcing and job loss is real.  Neither side of the political establishment was willing to address it.  Now we have Trump.



Edits:  fixed a misdirected source link.

The discussion has moved WAY past that though.  Been useless for 16-odd pages now.
"The mathematical formula for the number of motorcycles you need is   x+1, where x is the number of motorcycles you currently have."

Just Joe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1423
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1012 on: February 11, 2018, 03:18:18 PM »
see Trump. No one refused to sell him a wedding cake because he cheated on his prior wives).

This is the part about the baker's defense that I always had an issue with.  You previously committed adultery? You get a cake. This is your 2nd marriage? You get a cake. You just lied about something? You get a cake.  You guys had sex before marriage? You get a cake. Your gay? I must stand on my principles and no cake for you. Seems it's not all sin the baker hated. Just the one.

You hit the nail on the head for me. Also applies to many religious principles for me. A person can be all sorts "sinful" things in 2018 and still be a good, god fearing Christian but they better not be gay. -eyes rolling-

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2723
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1013 on: February 11, 2018, 04:41:18 PM »
see Trump. No one refused to sell him a wedding cake because he cheated on his prior wives).

This is the part about the baker's defense that I always had an issue with.  You previously committed adultery? You get a cake. This is your 2nd marriage? You get a cake. You just lied about something? You get a cake.  You guys had sex before marriage? You get a cake. Your gay? I must stand on my principles and no cake for you. Seems it's not all sin the baker hated. Just the one.

You hit the nail on the head for me. Also applies to many religious principles for me. A person can be all sorts "sinful" things in 2018 and still be a good, god fearing Christian but they better not be gay. -eyes rolling-

Yeah. And you can deny people the basic ability to purchase your products in the name of your religion and believe that doing so actually makes you a good Christian, ignoring the fact that Jesus consorted with all sorts and extended fellowship to criminals and adulterers, with no strings attached.
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

jrhampt

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1017
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Connecticut
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1014 on: February 11, 2018, 05:59:22 PM »
see Trump. No one refused to sell him a wedding cake because he cheated on his prior wives).

This is the part about the baker's defense that I always had an issue with.  You previously committed adultery? You get a cake. This is your 2nd marriage? You get a cake. You just lied about something? You get a cake.  You guys had sex before marriage? You get a cake. Your gay? I must stand on my principles and no cake for you. Seems it's not all sin the baker hated. Just the one.

You hit the nail on the head for me. Also applies to many religious principles for me. A person can be all sorts "sinful" things in 2018 and still be a good, god fearing Christian but they better not be gay. -eyes rolling-

Yeah. And you can deny people the basic ability to purchase your products in the name of your religion and believe that doing so actually makes you a good Christian, ignoring the fact that Jesus consorted with all sorts and extended fellowship to criminals and adulterers, with no strings attached.

And prostitutes!

calimom

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 518
  • Location: Northern California
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1015 on: February 12, 2018, 02:33:54 AM »
see Trump. No one refused to sell him a wedding cake because he cheated on his prior wives).

This is the part about the baker's defense that I always had an issue with.  You previously committed adultery? You get a cake. This is your 2nd marriage? You get a cake. You just lied about something? You get a cake.  You guys had sex before marriage? You get a cake. Your gay? I must stand on my principles and no cake for you. Seems it's not all sin the baker hated. Just the one.

You hit the nail on the head for me. Also applies to many religious principles for me. A person can be all sorts "sinful" things in 2018 and still be a good, god fearing Christian but they better not be gay. -eyes rolling-

Yeah. And you can deny people the basic ability to purchase your products in the name of your religion and believe that doing so actually makes you a good Christian, ignoring the fact that Jesus consorted with all sorts and extended fellowship to criminals and adulterers, with no strings attached.

And prostitutes!

Yes, somehow it's completely acceptable for them to beat their wives and defile their way through the Ten Commandments but a woman doing what she wants with her own body, or a loving gay couple sealing their union, well let's all just have a big meltdown.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 10015
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1016 on: February 12, 2018, 07:31:27 AM »
see Trump. No one refused to sell him a wedding cake because he cheated on his prior wives).

This is the part about the baker's defense that I always had an issue with.  You previously committed adultery? You get a cake. This is your 2nd marriage? You get a cake. You just lied about something? You get a cake.  You guys had sex before marriage? You get a cake. Your gay? I must stand on my principles and no cake for you. Seems it's not all sin the baker hated. Just the one.

You hit the nail on the head for me. Also applies to many religious principles for me. A person can be all sorts "sinful" things in 2018 and still be a good, god fearing Christian but they better not be gay. -eyes rolling-

Yeah. And you can deny people the basic ability to purchase your products in the name of your religion and believe that doing so actually makes you a good Christian, ignoring the fact that Jesus consorted with all sorts and extended fellowship to criminals and adulterers, with no strings attached.

And prostitutes!

Yes, somehow it's completely acceptable for them to beat their wives and defile their way through the Ten Commandments but a woman doing what she wants with her own body, or a loving gay couple sealing their union, well let's all just have a big meltdown.

What's very strange is that there isn't anything in the bible the explicitly condemns being gay either . . . while stuff like the 10 commandments is spelled out quite clearly.  So, it's not even a tenant of the religion to be hateful to gay people, just something that many Christians feel happy to do.

jrhampt

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1017
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Connecticut
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1017 on: February 12, 2018, 07:58:28 AM »
I can actually think of several verses in both the old and new testaments that are anti-homosexuality.  I disagree with them, but they’re definitely there.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6256
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1018 on: February 12, 2018, 08:13:03 AM »
I can actually think of several verses in both the old and new testaments that are anti-homosexuality.  I disagree with them, but they’re definitely there.

I've never understood why anyone would point to the bible as justification for anything.  The bible is pro-slavery and anti-democracy.  The bible forbids trimming your beard and eating shellfish.  The bible says that if your daughter refuses to marry her rapist, you should stone her to death (not him, her).  The bible is a seriously fucked up place to look for your moral compass.

And I don't even mean that as a criticism!  It was written in a different time, by people for whom these rules seemed normal and acceptable.  We hadn't yet invented bread that rises, and people think it has something relevant to say about the civil rights movement?

But societies progress over time.  We figure stuff out, we change our ways and most people accept that we have changed them for the better.  It just seems silly to latch on to particular anachronism while ignoring all of the others.  You have to look at the totality, in context.  In that light, it's an interesting piece of history but not exactly a useful reference text.

jrhampt

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1017
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Connecticut
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1019 on: February 12, 2018, 08:15:03 AM »
I can actually think of several verses in both the old and new testaments that are anti-homosexuality.  I disagree with them, but they’re definitely there.

I've never understood why anyone would point to the bible as justification for anything.  The bible is pro-slavery and anti-democracy.  The bible forbids trimming your beard and eating shellfish.  The bible says that if your daughter refuses to marry her rapist, you should stone her to death (not him, her).  The bible is a seriously fucked up place to look for your moral compass.

And I don't even mean that as a criticism!  It was written in a different time, by people for whom these rules seemed normal and acceptable.  We hadn't yet invented bread that rises, and people think it has something relevant to say about the civil rights movement?

But societies progress over time.  We figure stuff out, we change our ways and most people accept that we have changed them for the better.  It just seems silly to latch on to particular anachronism while ignoring all of the others.  You have to look at the totality, in context.  In that light, it's an interesting piece of history but not exactly a useful reference text.

Agreed.

e34bb098

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 16
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1020 on: February 12, 2018, 08:21:58 AM »
We hadn't yet invented bread that rises, and people think it has something relevant to say about the civil rights movement?

Not that I disagree with your overall point, but a central theme of the Exodus story is not having enough time to wait for the bread to rise.

partgypsy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1725
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1021 on: February 12, 2018, 08:51:47 AM »
We hadn't yet invented bread that rises, and people think it has something relevant to say about the civil rights movement?

Not that I disagree with your overall point, but a central theme of the Exodus story is not having enough time to wait for the bread to rise.

yes supposedly leavened bread was invented in Egypt, 200 bc.

Just Joe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1423
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1022 on: February 12, 2018, 10:25:27 AM »
So, this dude’s totally okay, right? I mean, it’s just food. They can obviously just go somewhere else.

http://myfox8.com/2014/02/07/oklahoma-restaurant-owners-says-he-wont-serve-gay-or-black-customers/

He's getting plenty of attention on the web. Apparently some folks are taunting him by listing his restaurant as a gay bar. Others are just leaving bad reviews. Karma if nothing else. 

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6256
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1023 on: February 13, 2018, 07:10:53 AM »
We hadn't yet invented bread that rises, and people think it has something relevant to say about the civil rights movement?

Not that I disagree with your overall point, but a central theme of the Exodus story is not having enough time to wait for the bread to rise.

yes supposedly leavened bread was invented in Egypt, 200 bc.
 

Bad news: the bible was already old hat in 200 bc.  Especially the sections relevant to this discussion.

Dabnasty

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 445
  • Age: 28
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1024 on: February 13, 2018, 07:39:54 AM »
We hadn't yet invented bread that rises, and people think it has something relevant to say about the civil rights movement?

Not that I disagree with your overall point, but a central theme of the Exodus story is not having enough time to wait for the bread to rise.

yes supposedly leavened bread was invented in Egypt, 200 bc.
 

Bad news: the bible was already old hat in 200 bc.  Especially the sections relevant to this discussion.

So now that this is a discussion of when leavened bread was invented, according to Wikipedia by 200 bc, breads had already expanded to cakes and pastries and commercial yeast was being produced. The oldest known sourdough dates from 3700 bc Switzerland.

ncornilsen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 712
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1025 on: February 13, 2018, 08:11:05 AM »
I skimmed the above, and don't beleive I've seen the following point made clearly.

Here's where it comes down for me, on the whole gay cake thing. I imagine the reaction by some people will be outrage, as they seem to be unable to grasp nuance of thought and can only process position statements of 140 characters or less... but none the less.

-If you're selling tires, computer mice, or pens, refusing to serve someone because they are gay is immoral and wrong, and rightly illegal.

-Refusing to sell a cake off the shelf, or that says something like "congratulations" to someone who is gay, is immoral and wrong, and rightly illegal.
 
-Reusing to sell a cake, quoting leviticus, doxxing the gay couple, is immoral and wrong, and rightly resulted in that Oregon bakery getting fined to death.

Where is gets fuzzy for me when you ask for a custom commissioned piece of (cake) art, that is specifically designed to celebrate a gay wedding.  If you're a (cake) artist, why shouldn't you have a right to say no if it's against what you believe, as misguided as that belief may be?
Artists, I believe, can and do refuse commissions all the time. There's a difference between refusing to sell a tire/sandwhich/computer mouse to a gay person, and refusing a commission for a 4ft tall double-penis cake with a "Anyone who touches this cake supports gay marraige!" sign sculpted into the fondant.

Suppose I wanted a swastika cake, or wanted a gay baker to make a cake that says "Trump is the best, and anyone who touches this cake endorses him 100%!"   You might respond that "gay people are a protected class, trump supporters aren't."  Well, now we're talking about what is legal and illegal, not what is necessarily right and wrong. There's plenty of room to have this discussion about that without calling those you disagree with hateful. 

I think you'd have to be an idiot to refuse making a cake for gay couples, both for the loss of business and the social blowback.  Regardless of my support for gay marriage, I don't like the idea that its OK to compel artists to do things they don't agree with, with the force of law. I hope you can see how that precedent may be a bad one to set, when an artist is forced to make something for a cause the left doesn't agree with.

« Last Edit: February 13, 2018, 08:16:31 AM by ncornilsen »

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6256
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1026 on: February 13, 2018, 08:14:07 AM »
So now that this is a discussion of when leavened bread was invented, according to Wikipedia by 200 bc, breads had already expanded to cakes and pastries and commercial yeast was being produced. The oldest known sourdough dates from 3700 bc Switzerland.

Well this TOTALLY clears it up for me, thanks.  It's absolutely fine to discriminate against gay people because cake rises, and the bible clearly backs me up on this issue.  Wikipedia verifies what we all know in our hearts. 

ncornilsen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 712
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1027 on: February 13, 2018, 08:18:51 AM »
So now that this is a discussion of when leavened bread was invented, according to Wikipedia by 200 bc, breads had already expanded to cakes and pastries and commercial yeast was being produced. The oldest known sourdough dates from 3700 bc Switzerland.

Well this TOTALLY clears it up for me, thanks.  It's absolutely fine to discriminate against gay people because cake rises, and the bible clearly backs me up on this issue.  Wikipedia verifies what we all know in our hearts.

(thick southern accent)  The cake rises to Je-sus.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6256
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1028 on: February 13, 2018, 08:30:49 AM »
Regardless of my support for gay marriage, I don't like the idea that its OK to compel artists to do things they don't agree with

The artist wasn't asked to do something he disagreed with.  He wasn't asked to make a penis cake.  He refused to make any cake, of any kind, because the customer was gay.  That's why the "artist" defense isn't going to hold up, IMO.

And as a secondary point, separate from that, an artist has a right to refuse a commission in many cases where a business does not have the right to refuse a sale.  A business is not a person.  A business that is open to the public is not legally permitted to be racist, or sexist, or ageist, in the same way that an ordinary private citizen bigot is permitted to be racist or sexist or ageist.

Can you image a McDonald's cashier refusing to take your order because you were black, or were wearing a yarmulke, or were in a wheelchair?  That's basically what happened in this case, and I think the state was right to drop the hammer.

partgypsy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1725
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1029 on: February 13, 2018, 08:33:34 AM »
I skimmed the above, and don't beleive I've seen the following point made clearly.

Here's where it comes down for me, on the whole gay cake thing. I imagine the reaction by some people will be outrage, as they seem to be unable to grasp nuance of thought and can only process position statements of 140 characters or less... but none the less.

-If you're selling tires, computer mice, or pens, refusing to serve someone because they are gay is immoral and wrong, and rightly illegal.

-Refusing to sell a cake off the shelf, or that says something like "congratulations" to someone who is gay, is immoral and wrong, and rightly illegal.
 
-Reusing to sell a cake, quoting leviticus, doxxing the gay couple, is immoral and wrong, and rightly resulted in that Oregon bakery getting fined to death.

Where is gets fuzzy for me when you ask for a custom commissioned piece of (cake) art, that is specifically designed to celebrate a gay wedding.  If you're a (cake) artist, why shouldn't you have a right to say no if it's against what you believe, as misguided as that belief may be?
Artists, I believe, can and do refuse commissions all the time. There's a difference between refusing to sell a tire/sandwhich/computer mouse to a gay person, and refusing a commission for a 4ft tall double-penis cake with a "Anyone who touches this cake supports gay marraige!" sign sculpted into the fondant.

Suppose I wanted a swastika cake, or wanted a gay baker to make a cake that says "Trump is the best, and anyone who touches this cake endorses him 100%!"   You might respond that "gay people are a protected class, trump supporters aren't."  Well, now we're talking about what is legal and illegal, not what is necessarily right and wrong. There's plenty of room to have this discussion about that without calling those you disagree with hateful. 

I think you'd have to be an idiot to refuse making a cake for gay couples, both for the loss of business and the social blowback.  Regardless of my support for gay marriage, I don't like the idea that its OK to compel artists to do things they don't agree with, with the force of law. I hope you can see how that precedent may be a bad one to set, when an artist is forced to make something for a cause the left doesn't agree with.

And I agree with you. If someone is an artist, they can refuse to do commissioned work, or "art". It will be up to the courts to determine at what point say putting someone's names on a cake constitutes art or not. I also wonder, what would happen if the gay couple orders a fancy but traditional wedding cake, and is refused because it is a) an obvious wedding cake and b) for a gay couple. For example the baker has made many cakes with white chocolate foudant covered with cascades of tiny roses made of icing for other customers, Has no problem with that kind of cake or that kind of decoration. BUT- he doesn't want to make THAT kind of cake, for a gay couple. Would that also go under the being able to refused commissioned work?
From what I read for the Masterpiece cake shop, they never got to the point of discussing what was going to go onto the cake, the actual "craft" part. Once he found out it was for a gay wedding, that's when the refusal happened.



Bottom line. Now that we have things like civil rights acts, and women being able to work and all, the wedge issues that the Republican party are getting more silly. I mean that's why I moved away from the Church. You have church goers who find it perfectly OK or even preferable to elect someone like Roy Moore, a self-declared Christian who has done despicable things, using their position of power to abuse minors, as well as the rule of law, over a person with morals and ethics like Doug Jones. Or the evangelicals who elected Trump. I can understand some libertarian white male LOVING Trump because he's all about money and power and grabbing as much as you can, while having no protections for people who are vulnerable. But I don't understand why evangelicals are lining up behind Trump when he is in opposition of Christian values, I mean he literally exemplifies it, in how he lives his life, and what things come out of his mouth. and yet he's their leader.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2018, 08:50:51 AM by partgypsy »

MrMoogle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1030 on: February 13, 2018, 08:37:34 AM »
Regardless of my support for gay marriage, I don't like the idea that its OK to compel artists to do things they don't agree with

The artist wasn't asked to do something he disagreed with.  He wasn't asked to make a penis cake.  He refused to make any cake, of any kind, because the customer was gay.  That's why the "artist" defense isn't going to hold up, IMO.

And as a secondary point, separate from that, an artist has a right to refuse a commission in many cases where a business does not have the right to refuse a sale.  A business is not a person.  A business that is open to the public is not legally permitted to be racist, or sexist, or ageist, in the same way that an ordinary private citizen bigot is permitted to be racist or sexist or ageist.

Can you image a McDonald's cashier refusing to take your order because you were black, or were wearing a yarmulke, or were in a wheelchair?  That's basically what happened in this case, and I think the state was right to drop the hammer.
I think he was talking in general, not on whatever specific case you guys have been talking about.  The original cake story I heard was about personalizing a cake, or at least that's how it was portrayed to me. 

He also said:
Quote
-Refusing to sell a cake off the shelf, or that says something like "congratulations" to someone who is gay, is immoral and wrong, and rightly illegal.

Anyway, thanks for the back and forth on this topic, I have learned a lot :)


ncornilsen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 712
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1031 on: February 13, 2018, 09:19:53 AM »
I skimmed the above, and don't beleive I've seen the following point made clearly.

Here's where it comes down for me, on the whole gay cake thing. I imagine the reaction by some people will be outrage, as they seem to be unable to grasp nuance of thought and can only process position statements of 140 characters or less... but none the less.

-If you're selling tires, computer mice, or pens, refusing to serve someone because they are gay is immoral and wrong, and rightly illegal.

-Refusing to sell a cake off the shelf, or that says something like "congratulations" to someone who is gay, is immoral and wrong, and rightly illegal.
 
-Reusing to sell a cake, quoting leviticus, doxxing the gay couple, is immoral and wrong, and rightly resulted in that Oregon bakery getting fined to death.

Where is gets fuzzy for me when you ask for a custom commissioned piece of (cake) art, that is specifically designed to celebrate a gay wedding.  If you're a (cake) artist, why shouldn't you have a right to say no if it's against what you believe, as misguided as that belief may be?
Artists, I believe, can and do refuse commissions all the time. There's a difference between refusing to sell a tire/sandwhich/computer mouse to a gay person, and refusing a commission for a 4ft tall double-penis cake with a "Anyone who touches this cake supports gay marraige!" sign sculpted into the fondant.

Suppose I wanted a swastika cake, or wanted a gay baker to make a cake that says "Trump is the best, and anyone who touches this cake endorses him 100%!"   You might respond that "gay people are a protected class, trump supporters aren't."  Well, now we're talking about what is legal and illegal, not what is necessarily right and wrong. There's plenty of room to have this discussion about that without calling those you disagree with hateful. 

I think you'd have to be an idiot to refuse making a cake for gay couples, both for the loss of business and the social blowback.  Regardless of my support for gay marriage, I don't like the idea that its OK to compel artists to do things they don't agree with, with the force of law. I hope you can see how that precedent may be a bad one to set, when an artist is forced to make something for a cause the left doesn't agree with.

And I agree with you. If someone is an artist, they can refuse to do commissioned work, or "art". It will be up to the courts to determine at what point say putting someone's names on a cake constitutes art or not. I also wonder, what would happen if the gay couple orders a fancy but traditional wedding cake, and is refused because it is a) an obvious wedding cake and b) for a gay couple. For example the baker has made many cakes with white chocolate foudant covered with cascades of tiny roses made of icing for other customers, Has no problem with that kind of cake or that kind of decoration. BUT- he doesn't want to make THAT kind of cake, for a gay couple. Would that also go under the being able to refused commissioned work?


The test is something along the lines of this:  If one person came into the bakery and ordered that cake, and it could plausibly be used in a non-gay wedding, then refusing to make it is wrong. Names are excluded - the way people use names, marrying a "Harold and Taylor" could go either way.   This would differentiate between the penis cake and the custom cascading roses cake.

Quote
From what I read for the Masterpiece cake shop, they never got to the point of discussing what was going to go onto the cake, the actual "craft" part. Once he found out it was for a gay wedding, that's when the refusal happened.

In this case, the baker was in the wrong.

Bottom line. Now that we have things like civil rights acts, and women being able to work and all, the wedge issues that the Republican party are getting more silly. I mean that's why I moved away from the Church. You have church goers who find it perfectly OK or even preferable to elect someone like Roy Moore, a self-declared Christian who has done despicable things, using their position of power to abuse minors, as well as the rule of law, over a person with morals and ethics like Doug Jones. Or the evangelicals who elected Trump. I can understand some libertarian white male LOVING Trump because he's all about money and power and grabbing as much as you can, while having no protections for people who are vulnerable. But I don't understand why evangelicals are lining up behind Trump when he is in opposition of Christian values, I mean he literally exemplifies it, in how he lives his life, and what things come out of his mouth. and yet he's their leader.
[/quote]

I am similarly confused about all the memes that show trump with some line about "Support this godly man against the forces of evil... 1 like = 1 prayer, 1 share=100 prayers!!!1!!"    Trump is a lot of things, Godly is not one of them.

As for implying that republicans are against civil rights and women working... really? Go look who voted for and against civil rights, for oen thing. We might be against some heavy handed proposals to make different groups look more equal without actually improving thier lot, but I'd say that's better than the soft racism of low expectations.

zoltani

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1069
  • Location: PNW
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1032 on: February 13, 2018, 10:10:25 AM »
"Charlie Craig and David Mullins visited Masterpiece on July 19, 2012, expecting to buy a wedding cake to celebrate their upcoming marriage. Phillips advised them that he would be happy to make and sell them any other baked goods. Craig and Mullins immediately left without discussing any details of their cake. The entire incident was about 20 seconds long.

The following day, Craig’s mother, Deborah Munn, called Phillips, who said he doesn’t make wedding cakes for same-sex weddings because of his religious beliefs and because Colorado law did not recognize same-sex marriage at the time. Despite obtaining a free wedding cake with a rainbow design from another bakery, Craig and Mullins filed a charge of discrimination with the Colorado Civil Rights Division under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA), which prohibits businesses open to the public from discriminating based on sexual orientation."


"Interestingly, while the Masterpiece case was ongoing, the Colorado Commission found that three secular bakeries did not discriminate based on “creed” when they refused a Christian customer’s request for custom cakes that criticized same-sex marriages on religious grounds. The Commission reasoned that, like Phillips, (1) the bakeries declined the requests because they objected to the particular message of the cake, and (2) the bakeries were willing to create other items for Christians."

« Last Edit: February 13, 2018, 10:12:18 AM by zoltani »
“The hardest thing in the world is to simplify your life. It’s so easy to make it complex. What’s important is leading an examined life.”

Yvon Chouinard

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 10015
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1033 on: February 13, 2018, 10:45:07 AM »
Odd that the commission reasoned that Phillips declined the request by the gay couple for a wedding cake because of the particular message of the cake . . . when he didn't discuss the message of the cake with them, but simply saw they were gay and said 'no'.

TheOldestYoungMan

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 738
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1034 on: February 13, 2018, 11:06:33 AM »

What's very strange is that there isn't anything in the bible the explicitly condemns being gay either . . . while stuff like the 10 commandments is spelled out quite clearly.  So, it's not even a tenant of the religion to be hateful to gay people, just something that many Christians feel happy to do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_homosexuality

To quote the late great Reverand James Lovejoy "Have you actually read this thing?  Technically we're not even allowed to go to the bathroom."  I'm not sure what argument you're trying to make GS, but if you really think the bible is silent on the subject of same sex relations then we'll just have to agree to disagree.  I own four different versions of the damned thing (haha, see what I did there?) it is obviously proscribed behavior.  Now, what takes a bit of deeper reading, and what some modern Christians struggle with, is the WWJD part of it.  I think its clear Jesus would have sold them the cake.  Except it would've tasted woody because Jesus was a carpenter not a baker.  Wedding cabinetry is what you want from big J.

And let me fix your assertion:

Quote
What's very strange is that there isn't anything in the bible the explicitly condemns being gay either . . . while stuff like the 10 commandments is spelled out quite clearly. [ed. struck as false]  So, it's not even a tenant of the religion to be hateful to gay [modifier included to be prejudicial] people, just something that many some misguided Christians feel happy to do.

Again, standard disclaimer:  I don't believe, as a Christian, that I am called upon to in any way behave any differently towards any other human, regardless of the facts of how they live their life.  I am to always assume everyone I deal with is "undercover Jesus" waiting to catch me treating someone badly.  It's fundamental to me to the extent that I don't believe it's right to not hire someone because of felony status, and I abhor all legalized discrimination based on past activities such as drug use, legal violations, etc.  Faith to me, means trusting others to do the right thing, and dealing with the consequences if they let me down.

But that's my religion and it works for me.  It isn't for me to impose that on anyone else.  If someone else believes their religion keeps them from doing a thing, that's really between them and their god.  I can believe they are misguided.  I can buy cake elsewhere, because to me it is just cake, but clearly to them it is something more significant.  I believe a legal protection should extend once, to us, it becomes more than just cake, such as it did with the lunch counters.

If your beliefs prevented you from servicing Christians, I am required by my Christianity to accept that.  And I believe your right to refuse me service based on that belief is constitutionally protected at this point.  I don't believe the government has the right to refuse me service because of my faith, and interfering with my ability to engage in commerce because of that belief feels like what happened to this guy.

And that you don't hold the same belief as him has got to carry at least as much weight as my argument that to me, it's just cake.  Which is to say none at all.  Because in these cases we shouldn't look to the preferences of the people who think it's just cake, we should look to the preferences of the people for whom it is more than just cake.
Notice is turned in! 35 days until FIRE!  I am excited and at the same time terrified!
Don't burn your bridges folks. 4 days prior to the date lost my home and rental property to Hurricane Harvey.  Still workin' Never quittin'

TheOldestYoungMan

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 738
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1035 on: February 13, 2018, 11:09:13 AM »
see Trump. No one refused to sell him a wedding cake because he cheated on his prior wives).

This is the part about the baker's defense that I always had an issue with.  You previously committed adultery? You get a cake. This is your 2nd marriage? You get a cake. You just lied about something? You get a cake.  You guys had sex before marriage? You get a cake. Your gay? I must stand on my principles and no cake for you. Seems it's not all sin the baker hated. Just the one.

You hit the nail on the head for me. Also applies to many religious principles for me. A person can be all sorts "sinful" things in 2018 and still be a good, god fearing Christian but they better not be gay. -eyes rolling-

Yeah. And you can deny people the basic ability to purchase your products in the name of your religion and believe that doing so actually makes you a good Christian, ignoring the fact that Jesus consorted with all sorts and extended fellowship to criminals and adulterers, with no strings attached.

And prostitutes!

At my bakery all prostitutes eat free cake. *nods*
Notice is turned in! 35 days until FIRE!  I am excited and at the same time terrified!
Don't burn your bridges folks. 4 days prior to the date lost my home and rental property to Hurricane Harvey.  Still workin' Never quittin'

TheOldestYoungMan

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 738
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1036 on: February 13, 2018, 11:39:08 AM »

Really?  You think that the chance of toddler tantrums by straight white people mean that non-white, non-straight people should not have the protection of the law against discrimination?  That's your argument?    Nothing to do with principle?  Nothing to do with what's right?  Just: the straight white people are going to unlawfully resist democratic laws enacted to protect historically and currrently oppressed people so lets not bother enacting those laws?

If you break that one down by racial divides you don't have the coalition you think you do.

https://sociology.yale.edu/sites/default/files/race_and_marriage_equality.pdf

But go ahead and blame it all on whitey.

On another note, when I read his argument, I figured someone would zero in on that regrettable piece of rhetoric.  You can strike it from his point entirely and respond to that, which is what I believe is closer to his intended articulation, or keep going with your assumption that he's a white racist, up to you.

Quote
More moderate libertarian types, like myself, or the guys at Marginal Revolution, or probably the guys at EconLog, can absolutely be horrified that blacks were treated as second-class citizens, and think this should be prevented even if those kinda fucks up parts of the Constitution. Blacks are a huge chunk of the population across a huge geographic area, and their treatment was really, really bad. Homosexuals in America are a substantially smaller portion and don't face anything like the discrimination blacks faced, outside of certain communities, and the inability to get a wedding cake is pretty small potatoes.

I didn't read that inclusion of the numbers as central to his argument, rather put there for emphasis.  As in, if we're going to enact sweeping federal legislation with broad powers and murderously harsh penalties it should be because there's an actual problem that calls for it and has no other resolution in sight.  Gay rights and the situation in general for homosexuals has been improving steadily in the U.S., and now, as then, the real successes have been not in adding legislation establishing the protected class, but stripping the legislation that enshrined certain biases and excluded, either explicitly or accidentally, homosexuals and homosexual couples.

The civil rights era in U.S. History, which many of you in this thread have gotten completely wrong, was an era where these forms of discrimination were explicitly legal and in some cases required.  The government was building facilities with separate drinking fountains.  It was the law itself that was the problem.  That's a fundamental difference to the baker case, where the problem is an individual asshole.

And so we have this legislation on our books that has a historical context, and the goal as a country should be to move towards a world where it isn't necessary.  I don't think we're there yet but we're getting closer.

Someone mentioned a swastika cake, and that is an interesting example.  In Germany you couldn't create a Swastika cake.  They have specific laws about shit like that because it was a problem for them, and their national shame calls on all of them to accept a restriction on their right of free expression.  We don't have a similar prohibition because, quite frankly, it's helpful when people raise that flag so you know they don't matter and can be safely ignored (or in the case of liberals, claim they're valid representations of the right and attempt to conflate the two).

So too in this country, our legacy of racial relations calls upon many of us to accept restrictions on our rights to discriminate, because we took it too far for too long, and refused to change by any other means.

There's a constitutional basis for the enforcement of things in the civil rights act as well, it's the 14th amendment, which is specific:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

And so a law that says same-sex marriage or relations between same-sex couples at the state level is unconstitional, and we see those victories happening again and again:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas

But a law that provides special protections to same-sex couples...that isn't as clear cut.
Notice is turned in! 35 days until FIRE!  I am excited and at the same time terrified!
Don't burn your bridges folks. 4 days prior to the date lost my home and rental property to Hurricane Harvey.  Still workin' Never quittin'

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1833
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1037 on: February 13, 2018, 11:52:51 AM »
So too in this country, our legacy of racial relations calls upon many of us to accept restrictions on our rights to discriminate, because we took it too far for too long, and refused to change by any other means.

There's a constitutional basis for the enforcement of things in the civil rights act as well, it's the 14th amendment, which is specific:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

And so a law that says same-sex marriage or relations between same-sex couples at the state level is unconstitional, and we see those victories happening again and again:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas

But a law that provides special protections to same-sex couples...that isn't as clear cut.

I'm not entirely clear on your argument here, I think your second-to-last sentence is maybe missing a word.

To my mind, this is entirely an equal protection and regulation of commerce issue. Citizens of a state have every right to transact business within the state. Given the Obergefell ruling, how is this different than a business refusing to serve customers based on heterosexual marital status?

Also, sexual orientation needs to be an explicitly protected class.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

Just Joe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1423
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1038 on: February 13, 2018, 12:15:30 PM »
As for implying that republicans are against civil rights and women working... really? Go look who voted for and against civil rights, for oen thing. We might be against some heavy handed proposals to make different groups look more equal without actually improving their lot, but I'd say that's better than the soft racism of low expectations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism_in_the_United_States

https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-Democrats-used-to-be-the-conservative-party-and-Republicans-used-to-be-the-progressive-party-Is-the-whole-truth-more-complex-than-two-parties-switching-their-main-ideologies
« Last Edit: February 13, 2018, 12:59:53 PM by Just Joe »

Wexler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 240
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1039 on: February 13, 2018, 03:19:08 PM »

Really?  You think that the chance of toddler tantrums by straight white people mean that non-white, non-straight people should not have the protection of the law against discrimination?  That's your argument?    Nothing to do with principle?  Nothing to do with what's right?  Just: the straight white people are going to unlawfully resist democratic laws enacted to protect historically and currrently oppressed people so lets not bother enacting those laws?

If you break that one down by racial divides you don't have the coalition you think you do.

https://sociology.yale.edu/sites/default/files/race_and_marriage_equality.pdf

But go ahead and blame it all on whitey.

On another note, when I read his argument, I figured someone would zero in on that regrettable piece of rhetoric.  You can strike it from his point entirely and respond to that, which is what I believe is closer to his intended articulation, or keep going with your assumption that he's a white racist, up to you.

Quote
More moderate libertarian types, like myself, or the guys at Marginal Revolution, or probably the guys at EconLog, can absolutely be horrified that blacks were treated as second-class citizens, and think this should be prevented even if those kinda fucks up parts of the Constitution. Blacks are a huge chunk of the population across a huge geographic area, and their treatment was really, really bad. Homosexuals in America are a substantially smaller portion and don't face anything like the discrimination blacks faced, outside of certain communities, and the inability to get a wedding cake is pretty small potatoes.

I didn't read that inclusion of the numbers as central to his argument, rather put there for emphasis.  As in, if we're going to enact sweeping federal legislation with broad powers and murderously harsh penalties it should be because there's an actual problem that calls for it and has no other resolution in sight.  Gay rights and the situation in general for homosexuals has been improving steadily in the U.S., and now, as then, the real successes have been not in adding legislation establishing the protected class, but stripping the legislation that enshrined certain biases and excluded, either explicitly or accidentally, homosexuals and homosexual couples.

The civil rights era in U.S. History, which many of you in this thread have gotten completely wrong, was an era where these forms of discrimination were explicitly legal and in some cases required.  The government was building facilities with separate drinking fountains.  It was the law itself that was the problem.  That's a fundamental difference to the baker case, where the problem is an individual asshole.

And so we have this legislation on our books that has a historical context, and the goal as a country should be to move towards a world where it isn't necessary.  I don't think we're there yet but we're getting closer.

Someone mentioned a swastika cake, and that is an interesting example.  In Germany you couldn't create a Swastika cake.  They have specific laws about shit like that because it was a problem for them, and their national shame calls on all of them to accept a restriction on their right of free expression.  We don't have a similar prohibition because, quite frankly, it's helpful when people raise that flag so you know they don't matter and can be safely ignored (or in the case of liberals, claim they're valid representations of the right and attempt to conflate the two).

So too in this country, our legacy of racial relations calls upon many of us to accept restrictions on our rights to discriminate, because we took it too far for too long, and refused to change by any other means.

There's a constitutional basis for the enforcement of things in the civil rights act as well, it's the 14th amendment, which is specific:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

And so a law that says same-sex marriage or relations between same-sex couples at the state level is unconstitional, and we see those victories happening again and again:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas

But a law that provides special protections to same-sex couples...that isn't as clear cut.

It's not entirely true that the civil rights movement addressed only government wrongs (laws requiring who could sit where) and not private behavior. The civil rights movement also addressed unfair racial discrimination in private housing transactions:
http://civilrights.findlaw.com/discrimination/housing-discrimination-u-s-supreme-court-cases.html
These were a big deal, because many private individuals did not want to sell their homes to minorities and many private landlords did not want to rent to minorities.  They perpetuated in this behavior in the absence of laws requiring it.  Eventually, the Supreme Court infringed on Mayer's right to refuse sell to his home to anyone his racist heart told him was unworthy.

 Frankly, as tired as some of our libertarian commenters are of what they think of as trivial complaints about cake, I am equally tired of moralizing bakers, not to mention pharmacists and nurses who don't want to fulfill critical components of their jobs.  How about all of these religious dissenters explain how they voted for thrice-married two Corinthians adulterer Donald Trump and then they can tell me how moral they are?  When we are done, they are free to run off to the mall to try to pick up teenage girls until the security guards kick them out.
 

TheOldestYoungMan

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 738
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1040 on: February 13, 2018, 04:02:19 PM »
Frankly, as tired as some of our libertarian commenters are of what they think of as trivial complaints about cake, I am equally tired of moralizing bakers, not to mention pharmacists and nurses who don't want to fulfill critical components of their jobs.  How about all of these religious dissenters explain how they voted for thrice-married two Corinthians adulterer Donald Trump and then they can tell me how moral they are?  When we are done, they are free to run off to the mall to try to pick up teenage girls until the security guards kick them out.

Well, alot of them didn't.  Many of the rest advised in advanced against nominating HRC.  Dealing with it after the fact as though there was a viable option that go-round is disingenuous.  There was no moral option, so you go with the group that isn't calling you a pedophile.
Notice is turned in! 35 days until FIRE!  I am excited and at the same time terrified!
Don't burn your bridges folks. 4 days prior to the date lost my home and rental property to Hurricane Harvey.  Still workin' Never quittin'

MrMoogle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1041 on: February 14, 2018, 06:47:18 AM »
How about all of these religious dissenters explain how they voted for thrice-married two Corinthians adulterer Donald Trump and then they can tell me how moral they are? 
Well I'm not religious, but I can provide some insight.  No one is one-dimensional.  So just because someone is religious, doesn't mean they also aren't an American, or a mother, or any number of things pulling them in different directions.  Trump, while he said many contradictory things, said he was going to defend religious freedoms.  As far as I know, Hillary did not, or at least she was viewed as weaker on that stance.  So the question is would you vote for someone who is a sinner, but will promote the same ideas you have, or a different kind of sinner who won't?

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1833
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1042 on: February 14, 2018, 06:55:51 AM »
Well I'm not religious, but I can provide some insight.  No one is one-dimensional.  So just because someone is religious, doesn't mean they also aren't an American, or a mother, or any number of things pulling them in different directions.  Trump, while he said many contradictory things, said he was going to defend religious freedoms discrimination.  As far as I know, Hillary did not, or at least she was viewed as weaker on that stance.  So the question is would you vote for someone who is a sinner, but will promote the same ideas you have, or a different kind of sinner who won't?

FTFY
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

ketchup

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3113
  • Age: 26
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1043 on: February 14, 2018, 07:55:00 AM »
Well I'm not religious, but I can provide some insight.  No one is one-dimensional.  So just because someone is religious, doesn't mean they also aren't an American, or a mother, or any number of things pulling them in different directions.  Trump, while he said many contradictory things, said he was going to defend religious freedoms discrimination.  As far as I know, Hillary did not, or at least she was viewed as weaker on that stance.  So the question is would you vote for someone who is a sinner, but will promote the same ideas you have, or a different kind of sinner who won't?

FTFY
As much fun as it'd be to not stick my wang in this particular hornet's nest, it is pretty hard to argue that 75% of the country's population (Christians) are somehow being limited on their "religious freedom."  The New Testament was definitely written in the mindset of Christians being the persecuted minority, which was the reality of its day, but that hasn't been true in western civilization since around the time of Constantine. 

Any blather I heard relation to Trump and religion was along the lines of "he's going to bring God back to America."  As if he somehow left.

Apart from Bill Maher types, there isn't much direct mockery of Christians, certainly not compared to other types of discrimination in this country.  Though I suppose somewhat ironically it's easier to convince a larger group that they're under attack by the man.


MrMoogle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1045 on: February 14, 2018, 09:07:25 AM »
Well I'm not religious, but I can provide some insight.  No one is one-dimensional.  So just because someone is religious, doesn't mean they also aren't an American, or a mother, or any number of things pulling them in different directions.  Trump, while he said many contradictory things, said he was going to defend religious freedoms discrimination.  As far as I know, Hillary did not, or at least she was viewed as weaker on that stance.  So the question is would you vote for someone who is a sinner, but will promote the same ideas you have, or a different kind of sinner who won't?

FTFY
I know Trump has said a lot of things, but can you show me where he has said he's going to defend discrimination?  I'm looking for something more than a "he said X, but really means Y" since I have trouble following some of those.

Wexler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 240
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1046 on: February 14, 2018, 09:22:14 AM »
Frankly, as tired as some of our libertarian commenters are of what they think of as trivial complaints about cake, I am equally tired of moralizing bakers, not to mention pharmacists and nurses who don't want to fulfill critical components of their jobs.  How about all of these religious dissenters explain how they voted for thrice-married two Corinthians adulterer Donald Trump and then they can tell me how moral they are?  When we are done, they are free to run off to the mall to try to pick up teenage girls until the security guards kick them out.

Well, alot of them didn't.  Many of the rest advised in advanced against nominating HRC.  Dealing with it after the fact as though there was a viable option that go-round is disingenuous.  There was no moral option, so you go with the group that isn't calling you a pedophile.

Dude-that's unfair.  We didn't even know their standards were so low as to ignore pedophilia until AFTER they voted for Trump.  You can't blame liberal "neener, neener, pedophile" shaming for Trump winning.  Meanwhile, I don't think that the kind of people who voted for Roy Moore are the types who, if we just coddled their gentle snowflake nature about a little more about their support for a pedophile, would have voted for Doug Jones.  Conversely, I ain't sucking up to Roy Moore voters and their ilk (and let's not forget the entire Republican establishment who threw up their hands and pretended that they had no other option but to support him).  The GOP can have them.  What does work, though (and that's why conservatives keep bitching about it), is pointing out to moderates the hypocrisy of the GOP and how low their standards are.  It actually worked in Alabama-lots of nice Republicans didn't want to bring shame on themselves and their state. So keep bringing up Roy Moore.  And Rob Porter and Stormy Daniels.   Keep asking your friends why they used to fleck spit at you shouting about Bill Clinton's sex life, but why they don't care that Trump paid off a porn star.  And don't let them turn it around.  We aren't the ones who shut down the wheels of governance because the president got a blow job.  They are the ones who told us it was impeachment worthy.  Let them explain themselves. 

Just Joe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1423
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1047 on: February 14, 2018, 09:24:23 AM »
Any blather I heard relation to Trump and religion was along the lines of "he's going to bring God back to America."  As if he somehow left.

Nah, what I think they mean is they will bring back rules and laws that put dissenters back under the thumb of the Christian right. No more gay rights, weaken a dozen other protections for everyone else, and actively promote the Christian agenda. It would strengthen the cultural right to be homophobic and xenophobic again.

The first step towards moving the clock back to the 50s and early 60s where their were straight, Christian whites and everyone else - and everyone else needed to be managed.

Nope, thanks.

Just Joe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1423
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1048 on: February 14, 2018, 09:32:52 AM »
Keep asking your friends why they used to fleck spit at you shouting about Bill Clinton's sex life, but why they don't care that Trump paid off a porn star.  And don't let them turn it around.  We aren't the ones who shut down the wheels of governance because the president got a blow job.  They are the ones who told us it was impeachment worthy.  Let them explain themselves.

Don't forget that while Gingrich was moralizing about Clinton's affair - Gingrich was guilty of the same, likely at the same time...

The corporate and political hypocrisy in this country is mind boggling. This is America - insert long list of platitudes about American exceptionalism, patriotism, God, history, struggle, etc.

Its all bullshit especially when politicians and preachers lecture us about it.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1833
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: Does Anyone Regret Voting Republican?
« Reply #1049 on: February 14, 2018, 09:35:22 AM »
I know Trump has said a lot of things, but can you show me where he has said he's going to defend discrimination?  I'm looking for something more than a "he said X, but really means Y" since I have trouble following some of those.

No, and I think you're being deliberately obtuse.

Because "religious freedom" in the context of American Christianity is a dog whistle for "right to discriminate." Christianity in America is not, and has never been, under attack in any meaningful way.

The idea that what consenting adults do in their own private space somehow affects a third party's religious life (or secular life, for that matter) is patently absurd. Any argument to the contrary betrays an authoritarian impulse that goes against many of the founding principles of the United States. People fought and died to expand those rights and principles to all people. The desire by a vocal subset of the population to regress is offensive in the extreme.

Basically, if you can't be nice to someone, just shut your face.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/