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

Guilty! Guilty! Guilty!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by Raphael View Post
    The law changed because the Civil Rights movement changed public sentiment. Public sentiment didn't change because the law changed.
    Things like that vary. In the US, legalization of interracial marriage significantly preceded a change in public sentiment on the subject. Whereas in the case of same-sex marriage, legal change lagged behind public sentiment:


    (from here)
    "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
    "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
    "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

    Comment


    • #77
      Is it just me or is it circular reasoning to point to court rulings on an issue when people are arguing about wheter the courts have been right about that issue?

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
        Sending people to prison is effectively slavery?
        Yes.
        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
        Than a fool in the eyes of God


        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
          There is a point to having a constitution. But ultimately the constitution is a piece of paper and if people defy it the piece of paper can't do anything about it. It's up to the people disadvantaged by the violation to start slashing throats or degrade into obscurity.
          "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
          -John Adams
          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
          Than a fool in the eyes of God


          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by phank View Post
            If you think wedding cakes have sexual orientations, you need to provide your research..
            Gay wedding cake:

            gay_1-1.jpg

            Hetero wedding cake:

            Tender-Moment-Wedding-Cake-Topper.jpg

            Any other dumbass comments?

            Also wedding cakes are not commodities like buying a hamburger or groceries. They are creative works of art done to specifications. They take a lot of time and the baker is an artist. You can't force someone to make a creative piece of art for you. Artists have the right to refuse commissions. If you are a portrait painter, you have the right to refuse to paint anything you want to, such as a portrait of Hitler, or a gay couple, or anything else you don't want to paint. Making a wedding cake is the same thing. If they were stock wedding cakes that were all just the same, then he would not be able to refuse to sell to a gay couple, but if asked to create a work of art, a customized creative cake, then the baker has the right to refuse.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              Making a wedding cake is the same thing. If they were stock wedding cakes that were all just the same, then he would not be able to refuse to sell to a gay couple, but if asked to create a work of art, a customized creative cake, then the baker has the right to refuse.
              This is correct, and in neither case concerning the two different bakeries, did they ever refuse to serve gay people in their stores for their on the shelf products.
              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                If they were stock wedding cakes that were all just the same, then he would not be able to refuse to sell to a gay couple...
                I disagree. I think a business owner has the inherent right to refuse service to anyone for any reason just as the customer has the inherent right to refuse to patronize any business for any reason. If we can legally force business owners to serve certain customers againt their will then logically we can force customers to patronize certain businesses against their will.

                So the question is, which businesses should gay people be forced to patronize?
                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                  I disagree. I think a business owner has the inherent right to refuse service to anyone for any reason just as the customer has the inherent right to refuse to patronize any business for any reason. If we can legally force business owners to serve certain customers againt their will then logically we can force customers to patronize certain businesses against their will.

                  So the question is, which businesses should gay people be forced to patronize?
                  Oh I agree that is how it should be, let the free market take care of things and let businesses refuse to serve anyone anything for any reason. But I was speaking in terms of the Civil Rights act, which says that a business has to provide the same goods to protected classes as they do everyone else. Artists have a right to refuse to make creative pieces or goods to anyone.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    Artists have a right to refuse to make creative pieces or goods to anyone.
                    Unless you're a Christian photographer. Then you can be sued for refusing to photograph a gay wedding.
                    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                    Than a fool in the eyes of God


                    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      I tend to agree with Darth regarding literalist vs original intent.

                      But even if you wanted to consider the original intent of the 13th Amendment, I don't see how you can suppose that they intended "involuntary servitude" narrowly, say to only mean black chattel slavery as then existing. If they had intended such a narrow meaning, then they would have had no reason to add an exception: "except as a punishment for crime". The fact that they felt the need to carve out an exception for involuntary servitude as punishment for a crime indicates that they had in mind the normal, broad, general understanding of "involuntary servitude."

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Joel View Post
                        I tend to agree with Darth regarding literalist vs original intent.

                        But even if you wanted to consider the original intent of the 13th Amendment, I don't see how you can suppose that they intended "involuntary servitude" narrowly, say to only mean black chattel slavery as then existing. If they had intended such a narrow meaning, then they would have had no reason to add an exception: "except as a punishment for crime". The fact that they felt the need to carve out an exception for involuntary servitude as punishment for a crime indicates that they had in mind the normal, broad, general understanding of "involuntary servitude."
                        I doubt they considered taxes, the draft, or jury duty involuntary servitude, and I think compliance with protected class laws can fall under that "legal duties" umbrella if need be.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
                          I doubt they considered taxes, the draft, or jury duty involuntary servitude, and I think compliance with protected class laws can fall under that "legal duties" umbrella if need be.
                          "involuntary servitude" clearly was intended to include not just private force but also government force, otherwise the exception for punishment for a crime would be unnecessary. But if being forced to fight in a war does not count as involuntary servitude, then it is difficult to imagine any servitude the government could force on people that could not similarly be excluded from "involuntary servitude". Can you think of any hypothetical example? With your reasoning, any servitude forced by the government could be called a "legal duty" and be considered an exception. But that would render the explicitly stated exception superfluous.


                          Perhaps there is no way to know what the original intent was regarding the draft. Perhaps among the people on the committee, among the members of congress, and among those in the states who ratified, the intent varied from person to person. Perhaps they didn't even think through the logical conclusions of what they wrote. Maybe if someone had brought it up, they would have smacked their heads and said, "Doh! We obviously have to write in additional exceptions for the draft and jury duty." But there's probably no way of knowing. Thus I think the literal way is usually better.

                          The fact is that the wording they actually passed is very broad, saying involuntary servitude shall not exist, and explicitly carved out exactly one specific exception. If they wanted additional exceptions, they should have stated them. They didn't (whether by intent or error). If more exceptions are desired, the Constitution needs to be amended.

                          It seems obvious that if someone challenges a law as violating the 13th Amendment, the government has only the following ways out:
                          1) Demonstrate that it isn't servitude,
                          2) Demonstrate that it isn't involuntary, or
                          3) Demonstrate that it is only specifying the punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                            This is great news. Just as the KKK needed to be actively rooted out after slavery was abolished, there are still those today who need to be stopped from persecuting gay people despite the fact that we now have supposed 'equality'. I hope case serves as a well-publicized example that inspires people not to discriminate against gay people

                            I note the fine is yet to be decided, and the specified amount is simply a theoretical maximum. US fines seem to be always waaaaaay over the top though. But I imagine they'll be no end of Christian groups fundraising to help them pay the fine. Bizarrely a gay-Christian group has already given them money.
                            That's right guys because you know... wanting to choose who you bake a cake for is the exact same thing as lynching blacks for wanting to vote. They are almost the same thing, if you squint a little bit, while holding your head at just the right angle, but it only shows up when you put on magical glasses, that also let you seen unicorns.
                            "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                            GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                              And who in their right mind would want a cake from someone who does not like you and you're forcing them to make it? Jesse Jackson once boasted in an interview published in Life magazine back in 1969 how he would spit in the food of white customers he didn't like when he worked as a waiter[1]. I imagine that someone who made the food could do worse.









                              1. Once he told of his days as a waiter at the Jack Tar Hotel in his home town of Greenville, S.C. Just before leaving the kitchen he would spit into the food of white patrons he hated and then smilingly serve it to them. He did this, he said, “because it gave me psychological gratification.”
                              It should be pretty obvious the issue has nothing at all to do with 'equal rights' as it has to do with people shoving their beliefs down people's throats and scaring everybody into compliance. There's bakeries all over the US that would be more than happy to bake anybody a cake. I think this one was chosen, on purpose, to force compliance upon the population because it isn't enough to 'win' the right to marry who you choose. Now you need to grab those who don't agree with your view still, into the streets, and destroy them personally.
                              "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                              GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by phank View Post
                                Nobody is being "forced to do work". If you go to a baker and buy a cake, are you "forcing" the baker to work for you?

                                The fines are for breaking the law, not for providing products for customers.
                                Become a Christian or else pay a fine of 10,000 dollars, per day, you're not a Christian. Remember, you're not being forced to become one, you just got to be one or else you got to pay a huge fine everyday you're not one. Seriously Phank, do you even think before you make these absurd arguments?
                                "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                                GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                234 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                189 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                311 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X