The Totalitarian Leftist Tactics against the Right

Ok, so it's not just marriage, but gay sex too that you feel it's okay to refuse service on the basis of.Doesn't the sex thing rather define the sexuality though ? In other words, isn't it like saying that racial discrimination is ok, if it's done on the grounds of someone's skin colour ?

In fairness, that chart is immigration - it's not refugees. And it's not 'into Europe' - it's based on statistics for two European countries (Ireland and Poland). The vast majority of immigrants to both countries are, of course, from elsewhere in Europe.People coming into Europe as refugees are skewed towards young men. While you are probably right that lots of women and children are fleeing the war in Syria; a woman carting young children along with her is much more likely to stop at a refugee camp in Turkey or Lebanon. It's easier for a young, single man to brave the often dangerous journey to his dream of a better life in Europe. And not all refugees are fleeing the war in Syria. Syrians are certainly the biggest single country (making up about slightly under a third of asylum applications in 2015); but many are from poor parts of Africa; or from other poor countries like Bangladesh, and these are overwhelmingly young men. 73% of asylum applicants in 2015 were men; and 42% men between the ages of 18 and 34. Interestingly this is not the case in Sweden, where there are a higher proportion of women and children compared to the EU as a whole - which I suspect may be something to do with how they have set up their asylum application system, but I'm not quite sure). In Italy, the most common entry point to the EU for people who make the crossing from Africa by boat, 74% of asylum applications in 2015 were men between the ages of 18 and 44.(Figures above come from Eurostat and apply to the EEA + Switzerland).

I didn't know there were other possible violeations of the Bible to be taken into account, all I ever had in mind was the effect of the legalization of gay marriage, which has had devastating effects on some Chrristian businesses.So you introduced a completely new area where the Bible also applies that I hadn't thought of. How gays live their lives doesn't affect Christians in most situations but you made me aware that it can in the case of a hotel. No, it's on the basis of what God says and God has affirmed that all human beings are equal, all descended from the same parents.

Faith writes:

quote:

---

all I ever had in mind was the effect of the legalization of gay marriage, which has had devastating effects on some Chrristian businesses.

---

If you cannot live up to the regulations required of all businesses, you have no business being in business.If you are uncomfortable with the requirement that you cannot discriminate against people on the basis of sexual orientation, then you need to find some other line of work.Or are you saying that anti-discrimination regulations are a bad thing? Businesses should be able to deny you on the basis of your sex, race, religion, veteran status?

quote:

---

No, it's on the basis of what God says

---

And god says that black people are to be slaves.That's what your Bible says, Faith. So was the Civil War won by the wrong side?

Good point. My interpretation of that Eurostat webpage is that the data are for the EU as a whole, but for that particular graph that the data from Ireland and Poland were provisional. If you look at the very similar graph for 2014 you'll see that its comment is consistent with this interpretation: "(¹) Excluding Slovakia. Bugaria and Poland: provisional."Thank you for the rest of that great information!--Percy

Faith writes:

quote:

---

The point remains: Christian businesses do not refuse gays because they are gay, they only refuse to do anything to validate a gay marriage.

---

The latter is inextricably linked to the former. Therefore, the claim that it "isn't because they are gay" is trivially proven false.Again, how does one "validate" a marriage if you aren't the one performing the sacrament?Are you confusing providing a service to a couple that will be used in their marriage with "validating" it?I don't think you understand what that word means.A baker bakes cakes. They aren't a participant in the marriage. That is reserved solely for the two people getting married. Thus, them buying a cake that they will eat after they go through a ceremony isn't "validating" the marriage anymore than you selling a gun to someone who then uses it in a crime is you "validating" their criminality or you selling a car to someone who then drives drunk is "validating" their drunkenness.If you go to a restaurant and they serve you spoiled food, you certainly don't eat it. You don't pay for it. You leave and go somewhere else.And you still call the health inspector and have them take action against the restaurant because they are not allowed to serve spoiled food.And they don't get to claim that their religious proclivities override the public safety laws regarding food preparation and service.So what makes you think that if a business that violates anti-discrimination laws gets to claim that their religious proclivities override the human rights of other people?It's really simple, Faith: If you open your business to the public, you are required to comply with all regulations for running a business and that includes the anti-discrimination laws. If you open your business to the public, you don't get to complain when the public shows up. If you cannot handle the idea of performing your services for the public, then you shouldn't have opened your business to the public. Instead, you should have remained a private contractor.Suppose you want to get your picture taken. You could go to Glamour Shots in the mall. They must take your picture. They are open to the public and they cannot deny you because of your religion. Remember, Faith, religion is one of the categories protected under anti-discrimination law.You could also try getting Anne Geddes to take your picture. She's a famous photographer. But, she can tell you no. Unlike Glamour Shots, she's not a public business but is, instead, a private contractor. She doesn't have to take your picture if she doesn't want to.If your religious proclivities prevent you from providing your services to gay couples who might use your product as a way of feeling good about their marriage, then you are free to find some other line of work.Do your religious proclivities allow you to deny interracial couples? Would you be "validating" "race-mixing" by doing so?

Faith writes:

quote:

---

Doesn't a business have a right to refuse service for whatever reason they want?

---

No.That's precisely the point behind anti-discrimination laws. Businesses do *NOT* have the right to refuse service for whatever reason they want. That little sign, "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone," isn't exactly true. They don't have that right.They cannot refuse you service because you're black.Or a woman.Or Jewish.Or a veteran.And in many jurisdictions, gay.If you are uncomfortable with that requirement, you are free to look for another line of work.

Your opinion of other people's motivations is worthless. I told the truth, that's the truth, there isn't any more to say.

Faith writes:

quote:

---

Finally thinking it through, if their reasoning was that the Bible calls homosexual sex a sin and they don't want to be in th position of contributing to homolsexual sex, which of course a hotel would be in a way that a bakery or florist or photographer wouldn't, then I'd say yes the English courts are wrong, the hotel owners should not be required to violate their Christian conscience.

---

And exactly how are they going to be "contributing to homosexual sex"?Are they going to be peeping?Hint: Gay people aren't constantly having sex. Just because two gay people share a room doesn't mean they're having sex.But then again, since anti-discrimination laws prevent refusing service on this basis, are you suggesting that we should do away with those laws?Would a hotel be allowed to deny renting a room to black people? To a single woman? She's probably a prostitute, after all, right? No respectable woman would be unescorted and we can't be seen as "contributing to prostitution," right? Or to an unmarried mixed-sex couple. They're probably fornicating and those pesky anti-discrimination laws preventing discrimination on the basis of marital status are an attack on your religious freedom, right?I've asked this question of you multiple times, Faith. Time to put up or shut up.

Faith writes:

quote:

---

Your opinion of other people's motivations is worthless.

---

That isn't an answer to the question, Faith. Try again:Again, how does one "validate" a marriage if you aren't the one performing the sacrament?

quote:

---

I told the truth, that's the truth, there isn't any more to say.

---

You mean anti-discrimination laws don't exist?If your religious proclivities prevent you from providing your services to gay couples who might use your product as a way of feeling good about their marriage, then you are free to find some other line of work.Do your religious proclivities allow you to deny interracial couples? Would you be "validating" "race-mixing" by doing so?How many times do I need to ask the same question before you answer it?

And when most of your customers will take their business elsewhere if you allow black people or gays to patronize your establishment, then the invisible hand in Capitalism will in fact reinforce the problem, not fix it.

There wasn't any particular problem. Until right-wing groups such as Republican State Legislatures attempted to force little girls to use the little boys room. Do you agree that the right-wing's attempt to force people to use bathrooms where they don't look like they fit in by applying legislative power or pressuring school administration is, in fact, authoritarian? Because Texas is filled with right-wing authoritarians who made life difficult for people -denying them access to a reasonable restroom, housing, employment etc, and some people sought to give those whose lives were being made difficult redress in law.

Yet you started this thread for the purpose of expressing your own odious and false opinions of a lot of decent people.

Trump Supporters Call For 'Liberal Genocide' and Deportation of Jews at Arizona RallyBut "leftists" are totalitarians 'cos they think this sort of thing is bad and say so out loud, so it's really six of one and half a dozen of the other.

If I've said anything even half as personally condemnatory of anyone as Percy said to me, I apologize. I'm happy to condemn liberal/leftist crapola, but not people.