Another couple denied marriage license...

Winky said:
If every piece of reverse discrimination legislation
were wiped away overnight
the crucial effect would be on the mind-sets of the
people who are supposedly discriminated against.
(oh I Shirley shoulda comma spliced that)
Click to expand...

Isn't reverse discrimination acceptance?
 
spike said:
The beauty of civil rights is that it gets rid of that type of discrimination.
Click to expand...

While I'm no less disgusted by that type of behavior than the average bear, I think private property rights should override government regualted behavior.
 
ResearchMonkey said:
Depends on which government you spreak of.

It should be a state/local issue not federal.
Click to expand...

Are you saying discrimination should be allowed under state law? The man's job, so far as I know doesn't include imposing his personal beliefs or judgment of people wanting to be married. His job is to perform his duties, and if he won't do so why should he have the job? Dereliction of duty seems like the most serious reason, outside of criminal activity to fire someone.

Who the fuck is he anyway the foreseeing eye of God? The Hammer of God?

I kinda doubt it!

:flame:
 
Gonz said:
While I'm no less disgusted by that type of behavior than the average bear, I think private property rights should override government regualted behavior.
Click to expand...

Believe it or not I am inclined to agree with you. If you can say, we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason...?

The only reason why I see there is any real reason the government should impose such laws is a matter of keeping the peace, and it is quite a consideration in my opinion. If the Ku Klux Klan opened a chain of restaurants and posted on the door was "No Niggers Allowed", don't you think that that would probably cause a great deal of crime and violence that wouln'd be near as likely to happen if that kind of overt racism isn't allowed in a publicly available private business?

BTW, this whole thread was a real world thread to begin with, but it just was born on the wrong day, perhaps it should be moved to where it best belongs?
 
catocom said:
then your post there doesn't make much sense to me.

Do you advocate for separation of church and state?
Click to expand...

Sure, I'm for separation of church and state. I don't see how that relates to my post or to this subject though.
 
randomJACKASS said:
The only reason why I see there is any real reason the government should impose such laws is a matter of keeping the peace, and it is quite a consideration in my opinion. If the Ku Klux Klan opened a chain of restaurants and posted on the door was "No Niggers Allowed", don't you think that that would probably cause a great deal of crime and violence that wouln'd be near as likely to happen if that kind of overt racism isn't allowed in a publicly available private business?
Click to expand...

Keeping the peace? If everyone were to do business with whom they chose, and it was common knowledge that is how business is done, there'd be no sense of entitlement to anothers goods & services.

The sign out front says NO LONG HAIRS, guess where I'm not doing business. Hell, I've had that happen, in a manner of speaking. I walked. They don't want my money, then fuck 'em, somebody will take it.
 
I guess what I don't understand spike is why you are trying to equate
a business(I guess) of performing a moral act, to one that has nothing
to do with morality.
 
catocom said:
I guess what I don't understand spike is why you are trying to equate
a business(I guess) of performing a moral act, to one that has nothing
to do with morality.
Click to expand...

It was a jsutice of the peace, he gets paid to do marriages, it is a business.
 
catocom said:
I guess what I don't understand spike is why you are trying to equate
a business(I guess) of performing a moral act, to one that has nothing
to do with morality.
Click to expand...

I don't see how religion or morality plays into either scenario. Just racism. Ok, I guess both the racists in either could be considered immoral.
 
people may not like it, but as of yet, 'racism' in it's self is not a crime.

also, as I've said before...
on the subject of marriage, I also believe in separation from the 'state'.

separation would solve most particular problems in that area.

so then....if marriage is not a moral issue, why have it, or care if anyone else does?.
 
catocom said:
people may not like it, but as of yet, 'racism' in it's self is not a crime.

also, as I've said before...
on the subject of marriage, I also believe in separation from the 'state'.

separation would solve most particular problems in that area.

so then....if marriage is not a moral issue, why have it, or care if anyone else does?.
Click to expand...

marriage is governed by the state. There are laws pertaining to it, that is why you must get a marriage license.
 
and why is that? (rhetorical) ...because of money (tax issues)

That's why I think it should go back to the 'state' butting out of that business.
 
catocom said:
people may not like it, but as of yet, 'racism' in it's self is not a crime.
Click to expand...

Racial discrimination can be a crime.

also, as I've said before...
on the subject of marriage, I also believe in separation from the 'state'.

separation would solve most particular problems in that area.
Click to expand...

It may solve some problems and create other. Not sure. It sure would change divorce law.

so then....if marriage is not a moral issue, why have it, or care if anyone else does?.
Click to expand...

Why have marriage at all? I guess it's important to some people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top