Well, it’s not like Michael Sam’s doing anything…
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
Well that barely lasted 24 hours
You gotta love the article:
“Not sure what self-respecting human being would want wedding pizzas in the first place, but okay. We get it. You’re hateful.”
Yup, that’s it. You’ve gotta be hateful. Can’t possibly be anything else.
Good for them! (The Pizza Shop Owners).
I think the donations are real.
I am ALWAYS wary of the “true” source of any post on Social Media; so I don’t read too much into those.
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Good for them! (The Pizza Shop Owners).
I think the donations are real.
I am ALWAYS wary of the “true” source of any post on Social Media; so I don’t read too much into those.
Mufasa[/quote]
https://www.gofundme.com/MemoriesPizza/donate
As of the time of me pasting that, they are at $241,095
Holy shit. Just holy shit.
Either this Pizza shop is making bank, or Lawrence has the best hustle America has ever seen.
[quote]JR249 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Better safe the sorry is the employable cliche here.
Better to save religious liberty at the expense of the state’s compelling interest being subjugated in some instances.[/quote]
Where do we draw the line? What if a business owner claims his religion forbids him from washing his hands before handling your food, or someone who claims that his religion doesn’t allow him to follow proper sanitation disposal protocols? If there isn’t some modicum of sanity here, this can set a precedent that has unintended legal consequences.
[/quote]
Argument based on general welfare and safety. There, hand washing covered and safe. Having a wedding cake, not so much.
Funny… I’m a mason. Technically none of these people should be providing me with cakes, pictures or allowing me to get married in their church either.
I’m discriminated against.
I want my gofundme $
These pizza brahs know how to manipulate the public!
If you,re a mason, you are in the most protected group of all! You,re secret handshake stuff is even on our money!
[quote]FlatsFarmer wrote:
These pizza brahs know how to manipulate the public!
If you,re a mason, you are in the most protected group of all! You,re secret handshake stuff is even on our money!
[/quote]
Seems to me it’s the opposite. The “pizza brahs” didn’t buy air time. Media outlets were having fits that a Christian owned pizza place would choose to not cater a gay wedding (shocking!), though they’d welcome anyone anytime to eat there otherwise. In short, they answered an interview question honestly. And, the story having gone through national outlets brought them attention from the crusaders of tolerance (the irony) who apparently threatened them every which way but Sunday.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
crusaders of tolerance [/quote]
So stealing this.
Some co-workers and I are trying to figure out a way to get into this gofundme gig.
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
The same, however, cannot be said of random hardware store owner that refuses to allow a gay person to buy a dremel or power saw or whatever. So while I agree a business owner should be able to dispose of his/her property and business whatever way they may wish, I do not see that example being anywhere near a reasonable argument against current civil rights laws where they are applicable.[/quote]
I don’t follow the last paragraph. Are you saying a hardware store owner shouldn’t be allowed to decide who they’ll sell to, citing religious beliefs as their explanation? Or are you saying a random hardware store owner, who is not religious, should not be able to decide who to sell to?
As far as I’m concerned, in 2015, a store owner should be allowed to disposed of his or her assets as they see fit. An out and out bigot will be out of business very quickly, which is fine with me.
[/quote]
My entire point was that I agree with both you and DB, and beans, and smh. However, GIVEN THE CURRENT STATE OF LEGISLATION SINCE 1965 it is not really a tenable argument to make to cite religious reasons when refusing to sell a random hardware tool or product to a gay person because it does not violate a dearly held religious tenet–or, at best, you would face an almost impossibly hard job to show that it did. However, this does not apply to a situation like gay marriage which addresses central and dear tenets of the faith. That clearly represents a conflict. Same with contraception for a devout Catholic (although not all denominations).
Remember, I’m just as much in favor of the RFRA and non-interference as you and the others are.
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
The same, however, cannot be said of random hardware store owner that refuses to allow a gay person to buy a dremel or power saw or whatever. So while I agree a business owner should be able to dispose of his/her property and business whatever way they may wish, I do not see that example being anywhere near a reasonable argument against current civil rights laws where they are applicable.[/quote]
I don’t follow the last paragraph. Are you saying a hardware store owner shouldn’t be allowed to decide who they’ll sell to, citing religious beliefs as their explanation? Or are you saying a random hardware store owner, who is not religious, should not be able to decide who to sell to?
As far as I’m concerned, in 2015, a store owner should be allowed to disposed of his or her assets as they see fit. An out and out bigot will be out of business very quickly, which is fine with me.
[/quote]
My entire point was that I agree with both you and DB, and beans, and smh. However, GIVEN THE CURRENT STATE OF LEGISLATION SINCE 1965 it is not really a tenable argument to make to cite religious reasons when refusing to sell a random hardware tool or product to a gay person because it does not violate a dearly held religious tenet–or, at best, you would face an almost impossibly hard job to show that it did. However, this does not apply to a situation like gay marriage which addresses central and dear tenets of the faith. That clearly represents a conflict. Same with contraception for a devout Catholic (although not all denominations).
Remember, I’m just as much in favor of the RFRA and non-interference as you and the others are.[/quote]
This. And I’d wager you’d have to look far and wide for a supposed Christian that wouldn’t have sold that hardware tool anyways. I guarantee that the vast majority of Christians feel the same way as the pizzeria owner. Be welcoming, neighborly, and accommodating…Except when in those specific circumstances. Even that apparently warrants threats to life and limb these days. We are talking about very specific circumstances and issues that bump into, well, my own faith, for example.
[quote]FlatsFarmer wrote:
Now we’re getting to the central issue!
Non-fundamentalists see these Religious objections as silly. If you’re anti-gay and you claim “the bible says” you should also NOT
-use yeast in your baking
-be fat, or serve fat people
-have pierced ears/tattoos, or serve people with pierced ears/tattoos
-no 2nd weddings, or serving divorcees
-throw stones or something
To specifically single out “gay-marriage” as the ONE thing that is SO offensive really seems ridiculous. Even the Pope has adjusted the stance of the church.
The louder the fundamentalists yell about this ONE issue, the more they sound like snake-handlers or Westboro Baptists.
Back to the actual laws.
Someone posted a link to 10 groups helped by Religious Freedoms Laws. They were all small minority groups facing laws that could be PERCEIVED as “oppressive” and “arbitrary.” No eagle feathers or peyote for Native Americans, no beard for an imprisoned Muslim. In all cases it APPEARED like the laws of “the many” vindictively oppressed the freedom(civil rights) of the “peaceful few.”
To liberal types, Religious Freedoms laws today APPEAR to allow the “many”(conservative people with nice things) to use Freedom of Religion to discriminate against the Civil Rights of few (Gays, who just finally can enjoy what everyone else has enjoyed for hundreds of years).
As Strider says, the Religious Freedoms Laws, used the way Indiana appeared to be using them, looked like they violated Civil Rights laws. To liberal/reformer types, Civil Rights trump all other rights, right?
[/quote]
With respect, that’s not actually what I was saying or implying. Also as sexual orientation was not a protected class in Indiana until just now, there wasn’t a legal framework for them to be considered violating state statutes. So while it might be onerous, it wasn’t in any way a violation because there wasn’t a category to violate according to state law.
Your list of items the Bible talks about is also not applicable for various reasons to this situation, but that’s rather beyond the scope of this thread anyways and I don’t wish to derail.
The bottom line is that whether it is the religious rights of the few OR the many, religious freedom needs to be fervently protected. Because we as a nation were founded on that principle, if not always perfected in practice. Also because, if one day the winds should shift again politically, we need the established framework in place to protect those who were once in the majority and are now against the tide so to speak.
It does bother me when people equate anyone against any aspect of the gay marriage debate as a Westboro member. Again, beyond the scope of this thread but not remotely true and rather irksome.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]JR249 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I think we’ve lost site of the fact that most of these issues involve small businesses. McDonald’s will always require their employees to wash their hands whether it’s against their beliefs or not. [/quote]
I don’t disagree that private businesses should, in principle, be free to serve whomever they desire. However, I think it’s pretty clear that anti-discrimination laws aren’t going anywhere, and LGBT groups are gaining significant legal ground in becoming a protected class, so I don’t see much choice but to either accept the status legal quo or push for some legitimate religious exemptions, say for cases of marriage services, etc.[/quote]
I hear you. [/quote]
This is essentially what I was talking about in my long post. The concept of “central or dearly held religious belief” is pretty much why in my view it is acceptable for a Christian establishment to not want to serve a gay wedding cake/cater the reception, but NOT acceptable for some guy to refuse to sell hardware, or groceries, or shampoo, or whatever to a gay person.
Theoretically, they should be able to do what they want. However in reality considering the state of Civil Rights laws, they are not and will not ever be. Therefore I can see why there is a distinction between the two cases and why JR’s post here makes sense.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Good for them! (The Pizza Shop Owners).
I think the donations are real.
I am ALWAYS wary of the “true” source of any post on Social Media; so I don’t read too much into those.
Mufasa[/quote]
https://www.gofundme.com/MemoriesPizza/donate
As of the time of me pasting that, they are at $241,095
Holy shit. Just holy shit.
Either this Pizza shop is making bank, or Lawrence has the best hustle America has ever seen.
[/quote]
Mufasa—I agree on all points. Good for them as well.
Beans–they’re still paying loans, rent, and upkeep on all the stuff they are not using now due to the uproar, plus family provisions…I’m sure that money will be going to good use and not last as long.
Also, this is another example of people voting–or protesting–with their wallets in support of something they believe. That is probably why they have gotten such a big influx of donations. It’s not just about costs anymore for people donating, now its a statement on the culture war/politics.
Also good for these people “voting”
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Funny… I’m a mason. [/quote]
Funny, I’m not surprised at all :). Good for you!
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Funny… I’m a mason. [/quote]
Funny, I’m not surprised at all :). Good for you![/quote]
Thanks. It’s pretty awesome actually. Less booze than the shirners, which is sorta depressing but good people doing good things for other people.
In other news, they are at 267k right now.