While I agree that selfishness (whether individual or group) has contributed to suffering, I disagree that the general levels of selfishness have increased. It seems to me that you are experiencing the nostalgia effect.
The costs of gay marriage
- Thread starter The Thriller
- Start date
While I agree that selfishness (whether individual or group) has contributed to suffering, I disagree that the general levels of selfishness have increased. It seems to me that you are experiencing the nostalgia effect.
Black men will never be priests, right?
A white person would have the right to marry a white person, and a non-white person to marry a non-white person, so laws forbidding white people from marrying non-white people are not discrimination?
People have been sued for refusing commercial, public services to gay couples, not personal, private services.
I was wondering how long it would be before someone goes there. If you think the Mormon Church will embrace gay marriage and act like they always did then it shows your lack of understanding of the LDS church on a basic, fundamental level.
Hartsock
Banned
Comparing apples to avacadoes.
A self employeed photgrapher in new Mexico, a private baker in Seattle...
I agree that the comparison is bad. There is a really good comparison between your views and the views of people who opposed interracial marriages. You use the same arguments based on similar claims and cast in the same way. The comparison to slave-owners and the KKK is more tenuous.
I'm confused. Why would two lesbians insist on hiring a photographer who, due to moral standards, would likely be doing inferior work? Why would the police handcuff someone and drag them to a wedding to do a shoot?
Now, if by "decline", you mean 'renege on an already-signed contract', and if by "forced", you mean 'given a choice between doing the work and paying a hefty for reneging on a contract', then yes, I think it would be OK if a photographer tried to be break a contract and was given the choice between completing it and paying a hefty penalty. You think that's bad?
Currently, the line is drawn at advertising yourself to the general public as serving the general public, versus advertising yourself privately as serving privately. What line do you suggest?
Why would irrational people tend to agree with each other?
If they don't take government money or handle government cases, they are allowed to refuse.
Again, allowed.
I have seen nothing indicating they had a contract. Just that the photog refused to shoot the pictures. Not even the Huffington Post and CNN articles I have seen mention anything about a contract.
So are you just spinning, as usual, or do you bring up a contract based off soemthing you have read?
Not surprised you missed the point. Again.
Hartsock
Banned
It sounds like they sued out of principle. They knew the photographer violated the law and knew it would be an easy way to make headlines.
A white person would have the right to marry a white person, and a non-white person to marry a non-white person, so laws forbidding white people from marrying non-white people are not discrimination?
That is exactly what I have seen in the articles I have read.
Do you ever get friction burns?
The idea that "Natural law, tradition, religion" come down on the side of reason, or are compatible with "intellectual curiosity, and free inquiry" is side-splittingly funny.