USSC will not review NM SC decision: businesses cannot refuse service to gay couples

[brycejones]

This is a new form of slavery. Gays forcing others into doing what those people don't believe in. Its amazing that the ~10% of the population can force the country to bend to their will

Yep there is a real war on straight people out there.....

I missed the part where Jesus said stay away from people who don't believe exactly the same thing you do.

 

[classy]

So if I was a black photographer, I would be forced to take pictures if the Klan wanted to hire me to pictures of one of their rallys?

Hmmm...........makes no sense whatsoever

 

[nehalem256]

Lets say you owned a grocery store and the local farmers didn't want to deal with you because of a certain trait. Now because you have to truck in your meat and produce from farther away, your expenses are much higher, you are no longer able to compete with the other local grocery stores. You can either close shop or move out of the area. Now imagine if you're the customer whose only grocery store that would take your business shut down or moved away. Now your costs just went up. You can no longer afford to drive the long distance just to buy the food that you have to move out of the area. Congratulations, you've been effectively purged out of the area for your undesirable traits.

The difference is that the the photographer will serve gay people. They just won't service same-sex weddings. So the 2 distinctions are

(1) They are refusing service to an event they disagree with. This is 100% identical to a black person refusing to cater to a white power rally.

(2) 2 straight men can get same-sex married. Since according to the people that pass proSSM laws marriage has nothing to do with sex/pro-creation what does same-sex marriage have to do with sexual-orientation?

 

[classy]

Yep there is a real war on straight people out there.....

I missed the part where Jesus said stay away from people who don't believe exactly the same thing you do.

LOL

When Jesus sent out the 12 disciples to peach the gospel he said this

Luke 9:3-5
New King James Version (NKJV)

3 And He said to them, “Take nothing for the journey, neither staffs nor bag nor bread nor money; and do not have two tunics apiece.
4 “Whatever house you enter, stay there, and from there depart.
5 And whoever will not receive you, when you go out of that city, shake off the very dust from your feet as a testimony against them.”


Paul who received the gospel directly from Jesus he had ascended to heaven wrote this

1 Corinthians 5:11-13
New King James Version (NKJV)

11 But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner—not even to eat with such a person.

12 For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? 13 But those who are outside God judges. Therefore “put away from yourselves the evil person.”

 

[Incorruptible]

Yep there is a real war on straight people out there.....

I missed the part where Jesus said stay away from people who don't believe exactly the same thing you do.

The fake Christian really shouldn't be lecturing about Jesus.

This is disgusting, these are private businesses and the government has no right to force them to serve who they don't want to. Too many POS leftists have no respect for freedom.

 

[fskimospy]

So if I was a black photographer, I would be forced to take pictures if the Klan wanted to hire me to pictures of one of their rallys?

Hmmm...........makes no sense whatsoever

Nope, you wouldn't. Public accommodation laws allow you to deny service based on people's behavior all the time, just not due to their race or gender, etc.

As someone said earlier, public accommodation laws don't force you to serve everyone, what they do prevent you from doing is saying "we don't serve your kind here".

 

[fskimospy]

The difference is that the the photographer will serve gay people. They just won't service same-sex weddings. So the 2 distinctions are

(1) They are refusing service to an event they disagree with. This is 100% identical to a black person refusing to cater to a white power rally.

(2) 2 straight men can get same-sex married. Since according to the people that pass proSSM laws marriage has nothing to do with sex/pro-creation what does same-sex marriage have to do with sexual-orientation?

As usual with you, you go back to repeating the same points as if they haven't already been crushed in other threads. The courts have been clear that discriminating against actions that are fundamentally entwined with an immutable characteristic are the same as discriminating against that characteristic itself.

Case closed.

 

[Incorruptible]

So if I was a black photographer, I would be forced to take pictures if the Klan wanted to hire me to pictures of one of their rallys?

Hmmm...........makes no sense whatsoever

According to leftist idiots you should since you're violating their "rights" to your service.

 

[nehalem256]

As usual with you, you go back to repeating the same points as if they haven't already been crushed in other threads. The courts have been clear that discriminating against actions that are fundamentally entwined with an immutable characteristic are the same as discriminating against that characteristic itself.

Case closed.

The courts are full of hypocritical shit.

(1) Are you saying that a white power rally is not fundamentally entwined with an immutable characteristic? Want to bet a black person would not be forced to cater a white power rally?

(2) As I just said pro-SSM folks have been saying for years that marriage is not about sex/reproduction. So how is marriage entwined with sexual orientation?

And further, I believe it was the NM SC(or possibly the federal court in the state) that said something along the lines of since NM marriage laws do not explicitly require reproduction for marriage then clearly marriage isn't about reproduction. So by that same logic since there is no explicit law requiring marriage only between 2 people of the same sexual orientation; marriage has nothing to do with sexual orientation

 

[fskimospy]

The courts are full of hypocritical shit.

(1) Are you saying that a white power rally is not fundamentally entwined with an immutable characteristic? Want to bet a black person would not be forced to cater a white power rally?

(2) As I just said pro-SSM folks have been saying for years that marriage is not about sex/reproduction. So how is marriage entwined with sexual orientation?

And further, I believe it was the NM SC(or possibly the federal court in the state) that said something along the lines of since NM marriage laws do not explicitly require reproduction for marriage then clearly marriage isn't about reproduction. So by that same logic since there is no explicit law requiring marriage only between 2 people of the same sexual orientation; marriage has nothing to do with sexual orientation

Sorry, talk to the courts and read the many many opinions about this.

We have been over this before. Sorry to see you've learned nothing. Have you had any luck getting your toaster to sign the marriage forms yet?

 

[Texashiker]

It seems to me that this non-decision dovetails nicely with the Hobby Lobby case. A NM photographer's claim that she should be able to refuse to provide photographic services at a gay couple's commitment ceremony, because the photographs would have "expressed a message" that conflicts with the photographer's religious beliefs, was rejected by the NM Supreme Court on the grounds that the New Mexico Human Rights Act (NMHRA) makes it illegal to refuse service on the basis of (among other things) a person's sexual orientation. And now the USSC has refused to review that decision.

Really? This case made it all the way the supreme court?

And gays wonder why people hate them? The courts do not have anything better to do than to hear about a gay couple who wants their picture taken?

Let me guess, there were no murder cases, no rape cases, no child support cases, no child abuse cases that were more important than some stupid pictures?

The glbt community is wasting our tax dollars by dragging these cases through the courts.

If someone does not want to provide a service, go somewhere else, form a boycott, make a picket line,,,, do something besides tie up our already overloaded court system.

 

[IronWing]

LOL

When Jesus sent out the 12 disciples to peach the gospel he said this

Luke 9:3-5
New King James Version (NKJV)

3 And He said to them, “Take nothing for the journey, neither staffs nor bag nor bread nor money; and do not have two tunics apiece.
4 “Whatever house you enter, stay there, and from there depart.
5 And whoever will not receive you, when you go out of that city, shake off the very dust from your feet as a testimony against them.”


Paul who received the gospel directly from Jesus he had ascended to heaven wrote this

1 Corinthians 5:11-13
New King James Version (NKJV)

11 But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner—not even to eat with such a person.

12 For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? 13 But those who are outside God judges. Therefore “put away from yourselves the evil person.”

Your post clearly demonstrates that Paul wasn't even remotely a Christian. Going by Christ's words, we shouldn't do business with people who treated us poorly in the past. Seems reasonable.

 

[nehalem256]

Sorry, talk to the courts and read the many many opinions about this.

We have been over this before. Sorry to see you've learned nothing. Have you had any luck getting your toaster to sign the marriage forms yet?

What do you mean I learned nothing?

I learned marriage is a contract . Two straight men can sign a contract. Therefore I see no discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation when discriminating against same-sex marriage.

 

[fskimospy]

Really? This case made it all the way the supreme court?

And gays wonder why people hate them? The courts do not have anything better to do than to hear about a gay couple who wants their picture taken?

You hate them because they litigate to have the law enforced? Your homophobia keeps getting stupider and stupider.

Let me guess, there were no murder cases, no rape cases, no child support cases, no child abuse cases that were more important than some stupid pictures?

The glbt community is wasting our tax dollars by dragging these cases through the courts.

Can you point to a murder/rape/whatever case that SCOTUS or an appeals court declined to hear this year because they were overloaded by LGBT lawsuits?

If someone does not want to provide a service, go somewhere else, form a boycott, make a picket line,,,, do something besides tie up our already overloaded court system.

I think we saw from the Mozilla thread that this is the last thing conservatives want. When private individuals took their own initiative to scorn someone who had done something objectionable conservatives were enraged about that too. Why don't you just come out and admit you want to discriminate against gay people without consequences?

 

[fskimospy]

What do you mean I learned nothing?

I learned marriage is a contract . Two straight men can sign a contract. Therefore I see no discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation when discriminating against same-sex marriage.

While you're still wrong overall, I'm glad we had that breakthrough! From this point forward any time you try any of that toaster nonsense I'll be sure to point you right back to this post.

 

[nehalem256]

While you're still wrong overall, I'm glad we had that breakthrough! From this point forward any time you try any of that toaster nonsense I'll be sure to point you right back to this post.

Just because a marriage is CURRENTLY a contract. Doesn't mean that in the future it cannot be changed to not be bigoted to object-sexuals.

That is in fact the liberal argument. If a definition of marriage discriminates against a sexual minority then the definition must be changed to not be bigoted.

So again why are you arguing that 2 straight men cannot sign a contract with each other?

 

[DominionSeraph]

So if I was a black photographer, I would be forced to take pictures if the Klan wanted to hire me to pictures of one of their rallys?

You can't discriminate against them because they're white. You can't discriminate against them because they're Christian. But you can refuse to serve the group for their message, safety concerns, or heck, just because you don't like them individually.

The Klan is not a protected class under the 14th Amendment.

 

[Texashiker]

You hate them because they litigate to have the law enforced? Your homophobia keeps getting stupider and stupider.

Cases like this and the cake case are stupid. They are a stupid waste of tax payers money and court time.

Can you point to a murder/rape/whatever case that SCOTUS or an appeals court declined to hear this year because they were overloaded by LGBT lawsuits?

The case first had to go through the local courts.

Like I said, those courts did not have anything better to do with their time? There judge, bailiff, county clerk, court reporter,,,, did not have anything better to do? How many child protection cases, murder cases, rape cases,,,, were displaced because of this gay couple throwing a hissy fit?

When the case got to the appeals level, there were no death row inmates waiting on appeal? There were no murder cases waiting on appeal?

This is a trivial case. Suck it up, deal with it. There are more important things going on than some gay couple not getting their pictures taken.

Why don't you just come out and admit you want to discriminate against gay people without consequences?

And?

Why should I my tax money be wasted on people who live an immoral lifestyle?

 

[fskimospy]

Just because a marriage is CURRENTLY a contract. Doesn't mean that in the future it cannot be changed to not be bigoted to object-sexuals.

That is in fact the liberal argument. If a definition of marriage discriminates against a sexual minority then the definition must be changed to not be bigoted.

So again why are you arguing that 2 straight men cannot sign a contract with each other?

Nope, sorry.

 

[DominionSeraph]

*snip*

yathagr

 

[fskimospy]

Cases like this and the cake case are stupid. They are a stupid waste of tax payers money and court time.

The case first had to go through the local courts.

Like I said, those courts did not have anything better to do with their time?

When the case got to the appeals level, there were no death row inmates waiting on appeal? There were no murder cases waiting on appeal?

Can you point to any of these cases that were delayed because of the district or appellate review of LGBT court cases? Be specific.

And?

Why should I my tax money be wasted on people who live an immoral lifestyle?

Lol. I'm glad you finally admitted it. Nothing else to say about that.

 

[nehalem256]

Nope, sorry.

Again why can't 2 straight men sign a contract with each other?

I don't understand why you are having such difficulty with a such a basic question that underlies your beliefs?

 

[Texashiker]

Can you point to any of these cases that were delayed because of the district or appellate review of LGBT court cases? Be specific.

I do not work at that county clerks office.

I dont guess you have ever been in a court house? Ever been in a court house when child support cases are being heard?

Lol. I'm glad you finally admitted it. Nothing else to say about that.

I have always been open and straight forward about my opinion on gays.

 

[DominionSeraph]

I have always been open and straight forward about my opinion on gays.

Liar. "Herp derp health concerns."

Your racism and your religion. By hook or by crook.

 

[Texashiker]

Your racism and your religion.

I am not racist.

Nor does religion play a part in my post.