Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

< Last Thread   Next Thread ><<  1    2    3    4  >>Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: More hate from arizona

Maximum Peach





Posts: 9100
(9099 all sites)
Registered: 8/16/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/21/2014 at 10:09 PM
http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-ff-gay-rights-arizona-bill -20140220,0,6953661.story#axzz2u15joJYN

 

____________________

 
Replies:

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 15998
(15990 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/21/2014 at 11:41 PM
Group A doesn't agree with homosexuality and believes it's wrong.

Group B doesn't agree with the belief that homosexuality is wrong.

I believe people should be free to do what they choose as long as it's not hurting others so I don't really have a dog in the fight, but why are Group A the "haters?" Both groups disagree with the stance of the other, so....

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 67544
(67905 all sites)
Registered: 11/28/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 12:27 AM
Group B didn't try to pass a law that discriminates..................Group A did.


From the article.....

But opponents, including Democratic lawmakers and gay activist groups, describe the bill as unconstitutional, discriminatory and divisive.

It would “permit discrimination under the guise of religious freedom,” said Sen. Ana Tovar, a Democratic leader.

Democrat Chad Cambpell of Phoenix, the House minority leader, tweeted after the bill passed: “The world is upset with how Russia has treated gay rights...I think it's time for that same anger to be directed towards AZ.”

 

____________________

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9100
(9099 all sites)
Registered: 8/16/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 12:51 AM
Gays are just people, human beings. why should they not have the same rights the rest of us have.

 

____________________

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 11157
(11157 all sites)
Registered: 9/17/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 07:22 AM
It's just some dumb-a$$ right wing politician scoring some political points with some of his dumb-a$$ supporting voting base. The proposed measure would eventually be killed for being unconstitutional, but by golly the politician(s) who supported it will be heroes to their like minded supporting voting neanderthals and for some idiotic reason will feel good that they accomplished nothing.

 

____________________

 

Sublime Peach



Karma:
Posts: 7168
(7166 all sites)
Registered: 4/7/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 08:01 AM


[Edited on 10/12/2014 by jerryphilbob]

 

____________________
"If everyone demanded peace instead of another television set, then there'd be peace."

- John Lennon

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 11157
(11157 all sites)
Registered: 9/17/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 08:28 AM
It makes as much sense as passing a law that allows private services denied to someone that has been clinically diagnosed as being paranoid or depressed or whatever.

imo

 

____________________

 

Sublime Peach



Karma:
Posts: 7168
(7166 all sites)
Registered: 4/7/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 08:34 AM


[Edited on 10/12/2014 by jerryphilbob]

 

____________________
"If everyone demanded peace instead of another television set, then there'd be peace."

- John Lennon

 

Peach Pro



Karma:
Posts: 305
(305 all sites)
Registered: 2/2/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 09:15 AM
The thread name should be "More IGNORANCE from AZ". Ignorance of their own book, the bible. The bible clearly states that if you break one law(sin), you're a lawbreaker, and guilty of them all. Therefore, no discrimination is allowed. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. " And forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us. BTW, I am a born again, bible believing Christian.
 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 67544
(67905 all sites)
Registered: 11/28/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 09:26 AM
quote:


Have they been denied access to dining establishments?



Discrimination is not happening here. Period.







According to this new law, they could. ..... try reading

 

____________________

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 11157
(11157 all sites)
Registered: 9/17/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 06:37 PM
quote:
The thread name should be "More IGNORANCE from AZ". Ignorance of their own book, the bible. The bible clearly states that if you break one law(sin), you're a lawbreaker, and guilty of them all. Therefore, no discrimination is allowed. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. " And forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us. BTW, I am a born again, bible believing Christian.


+1

 

____________________

 

Peach Pro



Karma:
Posts: 341
(341 all sites)
Registered: 4/19/2010
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 06:53 PM
This was the quote of the day from the NY Times a few days ago:

"It is becoming increasingly clear to judges that if they rule against same-sex marriage their grandchildren will regard them as bigots."
ANDREW M. KOPPELMAN, a law professor at Northwestern, on why courts are backing away from bans on gay marriage.


 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3318
(3316 all sites)
Registered: 8/26/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 08:50 PM
quote:
Group A doesn't agree with homosexuality and believes it's wrong.

Group B doesn't agree with the belief that homosexuality is wrong.

I believe people should be free to do what they choose as long as it's not hurting others so I don't really have a dog in the fight, but why are Group A the "haters?" Both groups disagree with the stance of the other, so....


So, if my personal belief says that Christianity is wrong, is it ok for me to deny them a job on that basis along? It's no different.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 15998
(15990 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 09:58 PM
quote:
Why are gays so staunch on calling it a marriage? It is not. While I would be fine if they called it a union and gave them the same rights.


Agree 100%. Seems like the gays could give just a little on this and call it something besides a marriage.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 15998
(15990 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 10:06 PM
quote:
quote:
Group A doesn't agree with homosexuality and believes it's wrong.

Group B doesn't agree with the belief that homosexuality is wrong.

I believe people should be free to do what they choose as long as it's not hurting others so I don't really have a dog in the fight, but why are Group A the "haters?" Both groups disagree with the stance of the other, so....


So, if my personal belief says that Christianity is wrong, is it ok for me to deny them a job on that basis along? It's no different.


That's a whole separate question. Mine was this -- If two separate groups have opposing beliefs on the same subject, why is only one of the groups commonly called "haters?" You see one group demanding tolerance and acceptance while failing to deliver it themselves.

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3318
(3316 all sites)
Registered: 8/26/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 10:22 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
Group A doesn't agree with homosexuality and believes it's wrong.

Group B doesn't agree with the belief that homosexuality is wrong.

I believe people should be free to do what they choose as long as it's not hurting others so I don't really have a dog in the fight, but why are Group A the "haters?" Both groups disagree with the stance of the other, so....


So, if my personal belief says that Christianity is wrong, is it ok for me to deny them a job on that basis along? It's no different.


That's a whole separate question. Mine was this -- If two separate groups have opposing beliefs on the same subject, why is only one of the groups commonly called "haters?" You see one group demanding tolerance and acceptance while failing to deliver it themselves.


Why is that a separate question? If I own a restaurant and I won't hire somebody who is qualified for the job for no other reason than he is a Christian and I don't like Christians, that would be wrong and probably illegal (and yes, it would make me a hater). So why should that be any diffferent than a gay person, or a black person, or a jewish person being legally excluded from getting a job?

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 15998
(15990 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 11:05 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Group A doesn't agree with homosexuality and believes it's wrong.

Group B doesn't agree with the belief that homosexuality is wrong.

I believe people should be free to do what they choose as long as it's not hurting others so I don't really have a dog in the fight, but why are Group A the "haters?" Both groups disagree with the stance of the other, so....


So, if my personal belief says that Christianity is wrong, is it ok for me to deny them a job on that basis along? It's no different.


That's a whole separate question. Mine was this -- If two separate groups have opposing beliefs on the same subject, why is only one of the groups commonly called "haters?" You see one group demanding tolerance and acceptance while failing to deliver it themselves.


Why is that a separate question? If I own a restaurant and I won't hire somebody who is qualified for the job for no other reason than he is a Christian and I don't like Christians, that would be wrong and probably illegal (and yes, it would make me a hater). So why should that be any diffferent than a gay person, or a black person, or a jewish person being legally excluded from getting a job?


It's a separate question because I wasn't laying out or discussing any hiring scenarios.

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3318
(3316 all sites)
Registered: 8/26/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 11:20 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Group A doesn't agree with homosexuality and believes it's wrong.

Group B doesn't agree with the belief that homosexuality is wrong.

I believe people should be free to do what they choose as long as it's not hurting others so I don't really have a dog in the fight, but why are Group A the "haters?" Both groups disagree with the stance of the other, so....


So, if my personal belief says that Christianity is wrong, is it ok for me to deny them a job on that basis along? It's no different.


That's a whole separate question. Mine was this -- If two separate groups have opposing beliefs on the same subject, why is only one of the groups commonly called "haters?" You see one group demanding tolerance and acceptance while failing to deliver it themselves.


Why is that a separate question? If I own a restaurant and I won't hire somebody who is qualified for the job for no other reason than he is a Christian and I don't like Christians, that would be wrong and probably illegal (and yes, it would make me a hater). So why should that be any diffferent than a gay person, or a black person, or a jewish person being legally excluded from getting a job?



It's a separate question because I wasn't laying out or discussing any hiring scenarios.


Ok, we'll take hiring out of the equation. What if I own a grocery store and I refuse to do business with Christians based on my religious belief. You're ok with that?

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 15998
(15990 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 11:31 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Group A doesn't agree with homosexuality and believes it's wrong.

Group B doesn't agree with the belief that homosexuality is wrong.

I believe people should be free to do what they choose as long as it's not hurting others so I don't really have a dog in the fight, but why are Group A the "haters?" Both groups disagree with the stance of the other, so....


So, if my personal belief says that Christianity is wrong, is it ok for me to deny them a job on that basis along? It's no different.


That's a whole separate question. Mine was this -- If two separate groups have opposing beliefs on the same subject, why is only one of the groups commonly called "haters?" You see one group demanding tolerance and acceptance while failing to deliver it themselves.


Why is that a separate question? If I own a restaurant and I won't hire somebody who is qualified for the job for no other reason than he is a Christian and I don't like Christians, that would be wrong and probably illegal (and yes, it would make me a hater). So why should that be any diffferent than a gay person, or a black person, or a jewish person being legally excluded from getting a job?



It's a separate question because I wasn't laying out or discussing any hiring scenarios.


Ok, we'll take hiring out of the equation. What if I own a grocery store and I refuse to do business with Christians based on my religious belief. You're ok with that?


If you did that you wouldn't be classified as a "hater." Why not? That's the basis of my original question.

Example- Boo Tebow and you're perfectly fine. Boo Sam and you'll be a "hater." Just doesn't add up.

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3318
(3316 all sites)
Registered: 8/26/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/22/2014 at 11:42 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Group A doesn't agree with homosexuality and believes it's wrong.

Group B doesn't agree with the belief that homosexuality is wrong.

I believe people should be free to do what they choose as long as it's not hurting others so I don't really have a dog in the fight, but why are Group A the "haters?" Both groups disagree with the stance of the other, so....


So, if my personal belief says that Christianity is wrong, is it ok for me to deny them a job on that basis along? It's no different.


That's a whole separate question. Mine was this -- If two separate groups have opposing beliefs on the same subject, why is only one of the groups commonly called "haters?" You see one group demanding tolerance and acceptance while failing to deliver it themselves.


Why is that a separate question? If I own a restaurant and I won't hire somebody who is qualified for the job for no other reason than he is a Christian and I don't like Christians, that would be wrong and probably illegal (and yes, it would make me a hater). So why should that be any diffferent than a gay person, or a black person, or a jewish person being legally excluded from getting a job?



It's a separate question because I wasn't laying out or discussing any hiring scenarios.


Ok, we'll take hiring out of the equation. What if I own a grocery store and I refuse to do business with Christians based on my religious belief. You're ok with that?


If you did that you wouldn't be classified as a "hater." Why not? That's the basis of my original question.

Example- Boo Tebow and you're perfectly fine. Boo Sam and you'll be a "hater." Just doesn't add up.


No, if you discriminate against anybody because of religion or sexual orientation, you are a hater. And as far as Tim Tebow goes, despite popular belief, I don't think people hate him because he is a Christian. I think some people think he's not very good and if he wasn't an outspoken Christian nobody would even care about him to begin with. His popularity is based only on his beliefs and not actually based on his skills as a quarterback.

[Edited on 2/23/2014 by 2112]

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 67544
(67905 all sites)
Registered: 11/28/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/23/2014 at 02:41 AM
quote:
quote:
Why are gays so staunch on calling it a marriage? It is not. While I would be fine if they called it a union and gave them the same rights.


Agree 100%. Seems like the gays could give just a little on this and call it something besides a marriage.



Nice of you to solve the problem for them.... maybe they want the rights that a marirage gives them... why do you care?

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 15998
(15990 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/23/2014 at 08:35 AM
quote:
quote:
quote:
Why are gays so staunch on calling it a marriage? It is not. While I would be fine if they called it a union and gave them the same rights.


Agree 100%. Seems like the gays could give just a little on this and call it something besides a marriage.



Nice of you to solve the problem for them.... maybe they want the rights that a marirage gives them... why do you care?


As stated above, I agree 100% they should get the same rights but draw the line on calling it a marriage. Seems like a step in the right direction, as BOTH sides may be more willing to accept it.




[Edited on 2/23/2014 by alloak41]

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3251
(3257 all sites)
Registered: 10/5/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/23/2014 at 09:43 AM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Why are gays so staunch on calling it a marriage? It is not. While I would be fine if they called it a union and gave them the same rights.


Agree 100%. Seems like the gays could give just a little on this and call it something besides a marriage.



Nice of you to solve the problem for them.... maybe they want the rights that a marirage gives them... why do you care?


As stated above, I agree 100% they should get the same rights but draw the line on calling it a marriage. Seems like a step in the right direction, as BOTH sides may be more willing to accept it.




[Edited on 2/23/2014 by alloak41]


What specifically is that you have a problem with the term "marriage" as applicable to this discussion? Do you have some sort of personal resentment towards allowing gays being granted that terminology? Is your belief founded upon legal basis? Is it some sort of religious interpretation that makes you put up a wall on this?

It's just a matter of years before the generations that follow us will think how narrow minded and rigid in thought their grandparents were. The times they are a-changing.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8375
(8376 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/23/2014 at 10:03 AM
So there are no rights of ownership? Should you not be able sell the items you have paid for, from the location which you paid for, to whom you wish?

This is like the whole silly smoking debate or clubs/groups who want membership limitations. Why can't you post whom your business serves or who your group includes, and then let the market sort it out? If you get boycotted, lose your business, or go broke, isn't that lesson enough? Don't we have freedom of association?

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Sublime Peach



Karma:
Posts: 7168
(7166 all sites)
Registered: 4/7/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/23/2014 at 10:32 AM



[Edited on 10/7/2014 by jerryphilbob]

 

____________________
"If everyone demanded peace instead of another television set, then there'd be peace."

- John Lennon

 
<<  1    2    3    4  >>  


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software


Privacy | Terms of Service
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com