Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: These Businesses Don't Want Your Money If You're LGBT, Married Or Not

  1. #1

    These Businesses Don't Want Your Money If You're LGBT, Married Or Not

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/these-...married-or-not

    07.14.18

    Some businesses want to be able to refuse services to LGBT people, married or not, as shown in the disturbing court case of a Hawaii B&B owner who turned away a lesbian couple.



    Thanks to the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, the conversation around religious liberty and LGBT rights in the United States has been focused mostly on wedding services in recent months: Should bakers be able to cite religion in order to deny wedding cakes to same-sex couples? Can florists refuse to arrange flowers? What about stationery shops?

    But as a recently-decided Hawaii Supreme Court case should remind us, anti-LGBT groups don’t just want to make it legal to deny wedding services to LGBT people, they want to make it legal to discriminate based on sexual orientation and gender identity in virtually every area of public life.

    As the Associated Press reported, the Hawaii Supreme Court last week rejected an appeal from Phyllis Young, the owner of Aloha Bed & Breakfast, who had argued that she should be able to turn away a lesbian couple because of their sexual orientation.

    The couple, Diane Cervelli and Taeko Buford, didn’t come to Hawaii to get married—or even as part of their honeymoon. Rather, as Lambda Legal notes, they had come to Honolulu to visit a friend and her new baby. This was a clear-cut case of a religious-based service refusal that had nothing to do with a wedding.

    But the B&B owner was represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, the same group that represented the Masterpiece Cakeshop baker.

    According to the AP report, Young may appeal the Hawaii Supreme Court’s decision—one of several religious-based service refusal cases that could reach the United States Supreme Court in the next few years.

    What makes the Hawaii case stick out, Lambda Legal senior attorney Peter Renn told me, is that it had no specific tie to same-sex marriage—and yet the same group of LGBT opponents still backed it.

    “The other cases that we’ve been talking about involving florists and cakes center around a wedding,” he said. “And anti-gay discrimination happens in a broad range of contexts, including outside wedding services. This case illustrates that point.”

    Groups like Alliance Defending Freedom stand to benefit from advancing wedding-focused court cases, mainly because such cases seem to more successfully drive a wedge through public opinion.

    On one hand, Public Religion Research Institute data shows that 60 percent of Americans oppose religious-based service refusals, including nearly half of those who oppose same-sex marriage.

    But on other, a 2017 YouGov poll found that Americans were “torn” on the Masterpiece Cakeshop question: Even though a clear majority supported the Colorado anti-discrimination statute under which the baker was sued, 57 percent of respondents said they would take the baker’s side in the Supreme Court case.

    In other words, a not-insubstantial number of Americans generally oppose denying service to an LGBT person based on religious belief—but would allow it if the service were wedding-related. That’s one reason why cases like Masterpiece or Arlene’s Flowers in Washington State seem to receive such special attention from anti-LGBT groups.

    “They might prefer to have a case that deals with wedding-related services because it wrongly suggests that the exemption that the other side is seeking would be narrow but in fact we know it wouldn’t be narrow,” said Renn. “Giving a business a right to discriminate based on sexual orientation is in no way confined to wedding cakes and flowers for a wedding.”

    For proof, one need only look south to Mississippi, where an extreme anti-LGBT law known as HB 1523 remains in effect, in part thanks to the Supreme Court’s January decision not to hear a challenge to it.

    That law specifically enumerates a small handful of religious beliefs—namely that marriage is between a man and a woman and that gender can’t be changed—and then expressly protects discrimination based on those beliefs. HB 1523 doesn’t just apply to wedding-related services; rather, it can, as The Daily Beast’s Jay Michaelson noted, be cited by virtually anyone: doctors, therapists, landlords, employers, and so on.

    The Mississippi law is supported by the same people behind the wedding-related court cases that seem to garner more public and national media attention. Alliance Defending Freedom, the same legal group behind the Masterpiece Cakeshop baker and the Hawaii B&B owner, “played a key role” in the drafting of HB 1523, as the Washington Post reported.

    That law, more than anything, is proof that LGBT opponents won’t be content to stop at wedding-related service refusals if they start finding success in the courts, as Tim Teeman of The Daily Beast has reported.

    “The slope is very slippery and there is really no limit to the exemptions the other side would seek if religion, in fact, gave one a trump card to violate civil rights laws,” said Renn.

    But don’t expect broader religious-based refusal cases like the Hawaii B&B to be the first that LGBT opponents will try to use to carve out room for discrimination at the federal level.

    One reason why Masterpiece Cakeshop and Arlene’s Flowers are so appealing, as Renn notes, is because it allows anti-LGBT groups to argue that cakes and flowers are not just services, but speech. In narrowly siding with the Christian baker in Masterpiece, the Supreme Court dodged a direct reckoning with that argument, but it remains one that LGBT opponents are eager to have.

    “The other side might prefer to have the U.S. Supreme Court first review a case involving a freedom of speech defense that’s joined with religious defense,” said Renn, noting that the Hawaii B&B case wouldn’t fit that bill. “[With] the flower and cakes cases, the other side is arguing that their freedom of expression is being violated—and that’s obviously not an argument that one could credibly make when we’re talking about just providing transient accommodations to someone. There’s no expression involved there.”

    The Hawaii B&B case might not be the most likely to get propelled to the U.S. Supreme Court, then, but it is a telling sign of things to come: If LGBT opponents secure a license to discriminate in the area of wedding services, they will have their foot in a door that they can then try to wedge wide open.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    With it being easy to form your own religion, or become a minister of variety of ones with a click of a button, the potential to add to the hypocrisy is high. I'm waiting for the logical next step... The church of the anti gun to ban any NRA member from their services, or the Church of open borders to ban any #MAGA wall supporters. Each side won't know what to do with something like that.
    “…let us teach them that all who draw breath are of equal worth, and that those who seek to press heel upon the throat of liberty, will fall to the cry of FREEDOM!!!” – Spartacus, War of the Damned

    BTC: 1AFbCLYU3G1dkbsSJnk3spWeEwpqYVC2Pq

  4. #3
    Businesses must be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    Businesses must be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason.
    What if you are a government? A multi-national? A publicly traded company?
    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...o-discriminate

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    What if you are a government? A multi-national? A publicly traded company?
    www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?523722-Should-small-businesses-be-allowed-to-discriminate
    Government can't refuse service to anyone without a valid reason but there are very few services a government should be engaged in, anyone else has the right to refuse service to anyone for any or no reason, whether corporations should receive certain benefits like limited liability or not is a different question.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  7. #6
    OP fail.

    I was expecting a list of businesses that I could patronize.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Government can't refuse service to anyone without a valid reason but there are very few services a government should be engaged in, anyone else has the right to refuse service to anyone for any or no reason, whether corporations should receive certain benefits like limited liability or not is a different question.
    The problem is the government tries to force everybody to be like them in this respect just because they had to do it. On the other hand they are not suggesting citizens should be allowed to lie under oath to congress. This is very confusing. I am starting to think the government is somewhat hypocritical.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    OP fail.

    I was expecting a list of businesses that I could patronize.
    My attempts to locate Aloha Bed & Breakfast online have not been successful.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    My attempts to locate Aloha Bed & Breakfast online have not been successful.
    Maybe no Domain registration sites wanted their business.

  12. #10
    If a LGBT person wanted to buy a gun, could the gun shop owner infringe on their 2nd Amendment rights buy refusing to sell them a firearm?

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by VIDEODROME View Post
    If a LGBT person wanted to buy a gun, could the gun shop owner infringe on their 2nd Amendment rights buy refusing to sell them a firearm?
    Absolutely!

    And I should be able to kick their ass out for saying things I don't like, infringing on their first amendment 'rights'...

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    OP fail.

    I was expecting a list of businesses that I could patronize.
    HB would have found use in that list too.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Ron Paul know some weird people...



    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!


    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by VIDEODROME View Post
    If a LGBT person wanted to buy a gun, could the gun shop owner infringe on their 2nd Amendment rights buy refusing to sell them a firearm?
    They don't have a 2ndA right to buy from HIM, they have a right to keep and bear arms that they obtain from anyone willing to sell or that they make for themselves, it can also be argued that the government is supposed to arm the militia so if they are a male of military age they may have a right to be given a weapon by the government.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



Similar Threads

  1. Anyone subscribed to Tom Woods newsletter - Online money making businesses?
    By Son_of_Liberty90 in forum Personal Prosperity
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-06-2017, 11:04 AM
  2. After 9/11, Trump Took Money Meant for Small Businesses
    By CPUd in forum 2016 Presidential Election: GOP & Dem
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-02-2016, 11:42 AM
  3. LGBT School K-12
    By Danke in forum Family, Parenting & Education
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 01-30-2016, 08:21 PM
  4. Is money really what motivates businesses towards progress?
    By ronaldo23 in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 11-05-2013, 06:17 AM
  5. Linda McMahon: "Restore sound money! Force increased lending to small businesses!"
    By aspiringconstitutionalist in forum Peter Schiff Forum 2010
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-22-2010, 05:04 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •