TVStocks, MusicStocks and Life

Absolute garbage if one can discriminate against or fire for some supposed "sincerely held beliefs". Period. islander Mar 28, 09:39

I don't agree with the firing aspect; however, are you saying businesses should never be able to refuse services to another? RollingThunder Mar 28, 09:51

As I understand it, that's not the controversial part of the bill. Of course religious orgs should be able to decline to perform same-sex RogerMore Mar 28, 10:11

I agree with your very well-written points. On that level, I do see how people would abuse the real intent of the Bill. RollingThunder Mar 28, 10:16

if they are a public business, the law is clear that they can't discriminate {nm} slipping jimmy Mar 28, 11:07

Apologies everyone, busy at work! Trying to read thread now :) {nm} islander Mar 28, 13:31

My issue is with the bill because its a bad bill that could lead to worse bills. islander Mar 28, 14:13

All sincerely held beliefs, or only the ones you disagree with? shadowking Mar 28, 10:06

Anti-discrimination laws protect against discrimination based on certain grounds, such as gender, race, sexuality and religion. RogerMore Mar 28, 10:19

To clarify - Content of good required is ok to descriminate upon, purpose/ultimate use of said good not ok to descriminate based on? shadowking Mar 28, 10:41

No, you can discriminate based on content too. "Sorry, we don't stock male-male cake toppers and I won't order them in" is discrimination. RogerMore Mar 28, 12:55

By "you can discriminate based on content", I mean "discriminating based on content is not OK either" {nm} RogerMore Mar 28, 13:10

I assume the goal of the bill is to alter/ammend existing anti-discrimination law, so falling back on those laws as a criteria for shadowking Mar 28, 15:22

My understanding is that this bill wouldn't specifically alter any laws, but it includes a general provision that says something like... RogerMore Mar 28, 16:49

That is not a correct comparison DeanB Mar 28, 10:26

Sadly, this kind of thing has been happening for a long time. The Bill would just allow them to be blunt with their denial of services. {nm} RollingThunder Mar 28, 10:29

i dont think the issues in your first inside line come up much. If that did happen to me, I'd make them but might spit in their cupcakes ;) islander Mar 28, 14:15

At the risk of generalising it seems that a significant percentage of Americans still have a very deep puritanical streak that most of us... hyperzeitgeist Mar 28, 10:20

Thankfully, that percentage is declining annually. {nm} BSmurf Mar 28, 10:50

Europe exorcised all that by shipping the puritanical religious types to North America. DTravel Mar 28, 12:53

Even setting aside agreement/disagreement with others' sexuality, there is a more fundamental problem with the bill. DTravel Mar 28, 13:06

Now, if we could only get all those religions and churches to start paying taxes... {nm} BSmurf Mar 29, 14:25