Running Gator Posted October 11, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.70 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted October 11, 2017 1 minute ago, shiloh357 said: But what you're saying is that laws preventing people from imposing their bigotry on others is unreasonable and unconstitutional. That is your opinion and we will ignore it treat it what is it worth (which is nothing). Before you ignore me could you show me what in the Constitution gives the government the right to force people to serve someone that they do not want to serve? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Gator Posted October 11, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.70 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted October 11, 2017 22 minutes ago, ravindran said: Discrimination based on gender, caste, ethnicity - I am pretty sure these are not okay However, I do see the point that it would be legal. The 14th amendment is there to avoid discrimination between government and the people. I don't think it adequately addresses what happens between people. But if government does not interfere in the other forms of discrimination, who else would control? How else we can be assured that we don't go back to practices of centuries old? Would you give your money to a business that choose to go back to the practices of centuries old? I know I would not and neither would anyone I know. That is what would stop it. The market would work it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwikphilly Posted October 11, 2017 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 96 Topic Count: 307 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 18,136 Content Per Day: 4.63 Reputation: 27,816 Days Won: 327 Joined: 08/03/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted October 11, 2017 Hi RG..... I think I understand what you are saying.....there is nothing in the Constitution that can force a private business owner to refuse service to an individual.... Quote show me what in the Constitution gives the government the right to force people to serve someone that they do not want to serve? Quote Public Accommodations and Facilities Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in places of public accommodation because of race, color, religion, or national origin. Places of public accommodation are: hotels, motels, restaurants, movie theaters, stadiums, and concert halls. Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 has the same anti-discrimination provision as Title II, but pertains to public facilties, owned, operated or managed by state or local governments, like courthouses or jails. Until the Civil Rights Act of 1964, persons from minority groups were excluded from, or segregated in, restaurants, motels, theaters, and other places of public accommodations and public facilities. In the 1960s people protested public accommodation discrimination. On February 1, 1960, African American students were denied counter service at a lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina because the policy was that only white customers could sit at the counter; African Americans had to stand. The next day they returned with more students and the peaceful protest called a "sit-in" was begun. Across the South, peaceful sit-ins by students took place in more than 100 cities in 1960. Although the protesters were beaten, and sometimes sent to jail, they continued to peacefully sit-in until they achieved their goals -- desegregation of places of public accommodation. http://civilrights.findlaw.com/civil-rights-overview/civil-rights-law-and-history.html I would hope that no one would patronize anyone who would refuse a person because they "looked" different than they themselves do,its so ignorant God Bless,Kwik 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 54 minutes ago, Running Gator said: Before you ignore me could you show me what in the Constitution gives the government the right to force people to serve someone that they do not want to serve? When you show me what part of the Constitution is violated by having anti-Discrimination laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 6 minutes ago, kwikphilly said: Hi RG..... I think I understand what you are saying.....there is nothing in the Constitution that can force a private business owner to refuse service to an individual.... No, he is saying that there is nothing in the Constitution that forces a person to serve someone, say of a different color/ethnicity. And he says that our anti-Discrimination laws are unreasonable and unconstitutional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravindran Posted October 11, 2017 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 11 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 496 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 398 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/18/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted October 11, 2017 15 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: When you show me what part of the Constitution is violated by having anti-Discrimination laws. I guess this is what he is referring to Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kris Posted October 11, 2017 Group: Junior Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 17 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 102 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 45 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/26/2017 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/14/1971 Share Posted October 11, 2017 I have a question to a problem that is on the horizon. In Australia, the votes for "yes" or "no" to same sex marriage are in, 10 millions votes in total were cast. The result is pending but early polls show a yes vote to be the likely winner. I have 4 young girls at home who I've taught that marriage is only between one male and one female, I've taught them much from scripture, and reiterated that the Bible is God's word and is the whole truth, anything that is in direct conflict with the God's word is wrong. This is how I have raised my children, with truth and love. When the yes vote succeeds and legislation is written and eventually becomes law, when schools begin to educate my children that marriage between same sex couples is normal, when two male children act out school plays on stage as a couple, when my children begin to question me regarding the issue and I tell them their teachers are wrong, will I be liable and potentially charged for discrimination, bigotry etc? My girls are strong willed, they know what is right and what is wrong, they will without doubt raise their hand in class and politely inform the teacher that same sex relationships are wrong. I'm anticipating a future call from the school, and a direct confrontation with the department of education when the time comes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Gator Posted October 11, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.70 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted October 11, 2017 (edited) 34 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: When you show me what part of the Constitution is violated by having anti-Discrimination laws. The Constitution is violated by the government doing something they were not given the power to do by the Constitution. The whole point of the Constitution is to limit the power and actions of the government. Edited October 11, 2017 by Running Gator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwikphilly Posted October 11, 2017 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 96 Topic Count: 307 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 18,136 Content Per Day: 4.63 Reputation: 27,816 Days Won: 327 Joined: 08/03/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted October 11, 2017 Blessings Kris I think your question should have a Thread so everyone can really have a good discussion,although I think most of us live in the USA so we wouldnt be able to comment on how the Australian gov't would approach these things? I doubt there would be any charges filed for someone who lives according to their Faith,I believe that would be an infringement on your religious rights and freedom but I think it could possibly result in a civil action/suit WE are not OF this world,never will be,stand firm & strong in your Convictions and don't worry about things that may never come your way,just Trust God.....He is our Rock,our Refuge,our All in ALL With love-in Christ,Kwik 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwikphilly Posted October 11, 2017 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 96 Topic Count: 307 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 18,136 Content Per Day: 4.63 Reputation: 27,816 Days Won: 327 Joined: 08/03/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted October 11, 2017 Is that true RG? Quote And he says that our anti-Discrimination laws are unreasonable and unconstitutional. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts