Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

The Flowers and the Wedding -- Just the FACTS, please

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    I disagree. "It's always been that way" is not an argument based in reason.



    No one guarantees that "following your conscience" has to be easy...



    Hard to answer - and speculative.



    Sometimes - following one's conscience is hard. That's life.



    This is not really an argument, Jim. I don't know anyone who is only capable of doing one thing. And nobody said "stop making flower arrangements."
    Your last comment is absurd. People train for years and even decades to become the sort of expert required to be in demand in these sorts of fields. And I just don't see why in the world it makes sense to try to force them to work where they don't want to work. And they can't just plop themselves into another line of work and expect any sort of reasonable success. Their quality of life plays into this as well. People are in these sorts of businesses because it is what the LOVE to do.

    Now you and many like you are saying "If you don't believe what we believe, we are going to punish you and take away what you love - just to spite you!". Isn't that exactly what you dislike about Fundamentalist or 'Narrow minded' fanatics?


    Jim
    My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

    If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

    This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post

      We've had this discussion before, and I disagree with you. You are discriminating against people because your bible says "if their genitals match, they can't make love." Making love - being intimate, is the act. You are holding it to be moral when done by two people with differing genitals, and immoral when done by people with matching genitals. It's not about the act - it's about who is doing it.

      That is the definition of bigotry. It is identical to telling two people they cannot be married because they aren't from a matching race. You are linking morality to the genetic identify of the two people engaged in the act.



      The prohibition against incestual marriages is a matter of social/cultural habit, not a moral one. Some cultures permit marriage between first cousins, others consider it "incestuouos." The specific definition of incestuous is all over the map. Unless someone can point me to a harm done by incestuous marriages, I have no moral prohibitions against it.



      Funny - but not a moral issue, AFAICT. I suggest holding off on the sex unto the engine cools



      Again, until someone can show some form of harm, I find bestiality distasteful - but not a moral issue.



      Pedophilia is considered a disease - homosexuality is not.
      See? you just have excuses for each example why it is not "bigotry" to you. Yet if they legalized it, then it would become bigotry to deny them service. At least according to your reasoning.




      If they legalize pedophilia, I will not be making cakes for those weddings.
      And then you would be a "bigot."

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
        What I said was, if a business is created to operate within the context of a religion, I would have no problem with it. So if a florist starts a business to provide flowers for Christian religious ceremonies and rituals - I have no problem with it whatsoever.

        Of course, things will get interesting when a gay couple that is a member of one of these Christian sects approaches them.
        There might be a kerfuffle with polygamy, but not with homosexual marriage - the Bible defines marriage as between a man and a woman. That is why I chose the term "Biblical Marriage" and not "Christian Marriage."
        1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
        .
        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
        Scripture before Tradition:
        but that won't prevent others from
        taking it upon themselves to deprive you
        of the right to call yourself Christian.

        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
          Your last comment is absurd. People train for years and even decades to become the sort of expert required to be in demand in these sorts of fields.
          Claiming it is absurd does not make it so. 1) No one said following your conscience would be easy, 2) many people have to face changes in their jobs when markets change, so why is this any different?

          Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
          And I just don't see why in the world it makes sense to try to force them to work where they don't want to work.
          I don't believe I said anyone should be "forced" to work anywhere.

          Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
          And they can't just plop themselves into another line of work and expect any sort of reasonable success.
          That depends on the circumstances. I can no more claim/defend "everyone would be successful" than you can claim/defend "it won't work."

          Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
          Their quality of life plays into this as well. People are in these sorts of businesses because it is what the LOVE to do.
          Nobody guarantees that following your conscience is easy
          Your argument, Jim, is "because it's hard, people should be given a pass." That argument does not hold a lot of water with me.

          Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
          Now you and many like you are saying "If you don't believe what we believe, we are going to punish you and take away what you love - just to spite you!". Isn't that exactly what you dislike about Fundamentalist or 'Narrow minded' fanatics?

          Jim
          That argument could be made against those who fought to eliminate "white only" diners and fought against suffragettes and every other group that sought to change a social injustice. Sorry, Jim - but I don't find the argument compelling. When an injustice is found, people of good conscience will rise up and say "not here - not where we live." Those perpetrating the injustice will pretty much always see themselves as "victims" because suddenly they are being told something they have always done is no longer acceptable and will no longer be tolerated. That's pretty mucht he nature of social change.
          The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

          I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
            Your last comment is absurd. People train for years and even decades to become the sort of expert required to be in demand in these sorts of fields.
            All reminiscent of the numerous claims that top level cake decorating isn't an art that requires a good deal of skill seen in the threads about Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado.

            I'm always still in trouble again

            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
            "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              See? you just have excuses for each example why it is not "bigotry" to you. Yet if they legalized it, then it would become bigotry to deny them service. At least according to your reasoning.
              It's not bigotry - and they're not excuses. They're fairly simple arguments.

              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              And then you would be a "bigot."
              I would imagine, if society as a whole began to see pedophilia as a "moral good," then my position against it would be seen as "bigotry" and I would be in the same position you are in. Anyone who's moral framework is in the minority is going to have that experience. That's the nature of the beast. At that point I have a few choices:

              1) re-evaluate my morality
              2) re-evaluate how I conduct my business
              3) try to persuade society to think differently
              4) find a different line of work
              5) find another place to live

              I doubt I would do 1). I might do 2) I would definitely do 3). I might do 4). If push came to shove, I might even do 5).

              ETA: Of course, there's always 6) practice civil disobedience and deal with the consequences.
              The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

              I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                There might be a kerfuffle with polygamy, but not with homosexual marriage - the Bible defines marriage as between a man and a woman. That is why I chose the term "Biblical Marriage" and not "Christian Marriage."
                I don't draw the distinction you do - because I don't spend a lot of time on "the bible says." We have over 2500 different Christian sects in existence (AFAIK) and they all differ (to one degree or another) on what the bible says/means. Concerning same sex marriage, we now have multiple Christian sects that accept it and permit it. As far as I know, they all do so biblically. Pick the right set of verses and/or ignore the right set of verses and/or interpret the right set of verses and you can justify pretty much anything with "what the bible says." People have been doing it since the earliest days of Christianity.

                That's why focusing a business on a religion would work in theory - but I don't see it going very far in practice, unless a specific sect/creed is identified. As I've noted before, what a religious community does within the community is (mostly) the community's business. I will defend religious practice in that context (until/unless it crosses the line to doing harm or denying the rights of those outside the community). That is the boundary, IMO.
                The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                  Claiming it is absurd does not make it so. 1) No one said following your conscience would be easy, 2) many people have to face changes in their jobs when markets change, so why is this any different?
                  Because it is willfully imposed hardship, not a 'marketing change'.


                  I don't believe I said anyone should be "forced" to work anywhere.
                  Yes you did, and your own beliefs about abuse of power in the workplace are what tell the whole story here.

                  What you are advocating for here is that a boss basing an employee's success at work on a willingness to have sex with him is ok. After all, he is not "forcing" her to do it. That is the exact same sort of forcing. You are asking someone to do what they believe is immoral in order to succeed. How is it "forcing" in the one case but not "forcing" in the other?

                  Or are you consistent and you have no more compassion for the woman that must have sex with her boss to keep her job than you do the florist that must participate in what she sees as an immoral wedding to keep her job?

                  That argument could be made against those who fought to eliminate "white only" diners and fought against suffragettes and every other group that sought to change a social injustice. Sorry, Jim - but I don't find the argument compelling. When an injustice is found, people of good conscience will rise up and say "not here - not where we live." Those perpetrating the injustice will pretty much always see themselves as "victims" because suddenly they are being told something they have always done is no longer acceptable and will no longer be tolerated. That's pretty mucht he nature of social change.
                  There is no more injustice here than the florist refusing to do a flower arrangement for a wedding if the participants were divorced and she believes divorcees can not morally remarry.


                  Jim
                  My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                  If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                  This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                    I don't draw the distinction you do - because I don't spend a lot of time on "the bible says." We have over 2500 different Christian sects in existence (AFAIK) and they all differ (to one degree or another) on what the bible says/means. Concerning same sex marriage, we now have multiple Christian sects that accept it and permit it. As far as I know, they all do so biblically. Pick the right set of verses and/or ignore the right set of verses and/or interpret the right set of verses and you can justify pretty much anything with "what the bible says." People have been doing it since the earliest days of Christianity.

                    That's why focusing a business on a religion would work in theory - but I don't see it going very far in practice, unless a specific sect/creed is identified. As I've noted before, what a religious community does within the community is (mostly) the community's business. I will defend religious practice in that context (until/unless it crosses the line to doing harm or denying the rights of those outside the community). That is the boundary, IMO.
                    It would be a matter of deciding who gets to define the term in use. As to the matter of forcing people to provide contracted services under duress - that kind of attitude says much in criticism of the person doing the forcing. "We can't have a happy wedding unless we are making someone else miserable." What a sad attitude. Have to wonder how long marriages between people like that will last.
                    1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                    .
                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                    Scripture before Tradition:
                    but that won't prevent others from
                    taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                    of the right to call yourself Christian.

                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                      What I said was, if a business is created to operate within the context of a religion, I would have no problem with it. So if a florist starts a business to provide flowers for Christian religious ceremonies and rituals - I have no problem with it whatsoever.
                      So if a homosexual got turned away you would think it's fine. And what if that person decided to sue the florist. Which would you support?

                      Of course, things will get interesting when a gay couple that is a member of one of these Christian sects approaches them.
                      I knew someone would bring that up, hence my qualification of heterosexual marriage.


                      Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                        And then they go on and the wedding happens without them.
                        You really don't know much about weddings.
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                          Because it is willfully imposed hardship, not a 'marketing change'.
                          And we "willfully imposed hardship" when diners were no longer permitted to have "white only" diners and when prohibiting women from certain places/roles was reversed. I don't see a problem here. When society finally gathers itself to reject an injustice, those perpetuating that injustice will feel "abused" and "willfully harmed" and "disadvantaged" because they are being told "no more."

                          Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                          Yes you did, and your own beliefs about abuse of power in the workplace are what tell the whole story here.

                          What you are advocating for here is that a boss basing an employee's success at work on a willingness to have sex with him is ok. After all, he is not "forcing" her to do it. That is the exact same sort of forcing. You are asking someone to do what they believe is immoral in order to succeed. How is it "forcing" in the one case but not "forcing" in the other?

                          Or are you consistent and you have no more compassion for the woman that must have sex with her boss to keep her job than you do the florist that must participate in what she sees as an immoral wedding to keep her job?
                          What? Jim - you are reaching VERY badly. There is no equivalence between someone using their power over someone else to pressure them to have sex and society saying "the injustice is no longer tolerated." No one is being forced to do anything. They are actually being prohibited FROM doing something (exercising bigotry in the marketplace). They have many choices available to them to move forward by which they can avoid bigotry.

                          By your argument, telling the proprietor of the "white's only" diner that such bigotry is no longer acceptable and is cause for legal action is the equivalent of telling a woman "have sex with me or lose your job." The entire argument is absurd, IMO. But I will grant you that you're original. I've not heard anyone propose this line or argumentation before.

                          Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                          There is no more injustice here than the florist refusing to do a flower arrangement for a wedding if the participants were divorced and she believes divorcees can not morally remarry.


                          Jim
                          This is a false equivalence. Anyone can be divorced, so taking a position against divorce does not single out any particular class of people (except divorced ones). Gay or bisexual people same-sex partners. They are being discriminated against on the basis of their sexual orientation and their specific genitals.

                          There is no difference between saying to two people "you cannot marry because you are not the same race" and "you cannot marry because you have the same genitals." Both assess the morality of the action on the basis of the genetics of the two people involved. That is bigotry - pure and simple.
                          The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                          I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                            It would be a matter of deciding who gets to define the term in use. As to the matter of forcing people to provide contracted services under duress - that kind of attitude says much in criticism of the person doing the forcing. "We can't have a happy wedding unless we are making someone else miserable." What a sad attitude. Have to wonder how long marriages between people like that will last.
                            No one is forcing people to a contracted service. All that is being said is, "if you offer a contracted service, you must offer it without discrimination." It's as simple as that.
                            The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                            I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                              So if a homosexual got turned away you would think it's fine.
                              So let's be clear on what we are talking about here. In theory - if a business opened and said, "I provide services to Roman Catholic ceremonies and rituals," then there is no reason a same-sex couple would go there because the Roman Catholic church does not have a ceremony for "same-sex" weddings. If the gay person sued, I'd be on the side of the proprietor - they are being asked to provide a service they do not provide for anyone else: a non-Roman-Catholic service/ceremony. This is a business operating completely within a specific church with specific ceremonies. I provided the analogy of the bookstore earlier.

                              Things get a little dicier as the specification broadens out. If it is "just Christian ceremonies" - then we have the problem that some Christian sects have same-sex wedding ceremonies, putting us right back where we started.

                              Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                              And what if that person decided to sue the florist. Which would you support?
                              In the circumstances described above - the florist.

                              Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                              I knew someone would bring that up, hence my qualification of heterosexual marriage.
                              The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                              I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                                And then they go on and the wedding happens without them.
                                That's not how it works. Many florists are also the wedding planner, and actually tell the bridal party when to enter, when the candles should be lit, etc. Two of the florists I regularly work with are involved in the actual proceedings of the wedding.

                                You can say the same things (in different combinations) about the hotel that hosts the reception,
                                The hotel is a venue - it is not an individual that is required to go TO a venue to perform a service. Bad analogy.

                                the store that rents the tuxedos, etc.
                                The store is a venue - they don't go to the wedding to provide their service.

                                It doesn't matter.
                                Just because you say so?

                                If you are going to offer a service, it needs to be offered without discrimination to clients willing to pay. If you don't offer the service, then no problem.
                                The hotel is open to anybody to use the facilities they have, as they should be.
                                The tuxedo shop is open to anybody to rent any tuxedo they have in stock, as they should be.
                                The flower shop is open for anybody to come in and buy anything they have in stock, as it should be.
                                The bakery is open for anybody to come in and buy anything they have in stock, as it should be.

                                If you were a baker, and a client came in and demanded you create a KKK cake with "[F-bomb N-word]" on it, would you say, "absolutely, no problem, if you're a client willing to pay, I'll put anything on it you want?
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                157 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                373 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X