The Turn When I saw the left give up everything I believe in, I changed politically. You can, too.

[wdefromtx 3,641]

What’s ironic is we have people in here arguing about if a campaign slogan is racist, yet they voted for another racist old white dude. 

[I_M4_AU 8,981]

12 hours ago, cbo said:

Medicare for all

Cancel student loan debt

Defund (not abolish!) the police

Legalize marijuana

Tax the hell out of the 1%

Quit bombing other countries

Open the borders or at least treat immigrants with some modicum of respect

Modify or eliminate corporate campaign contributions

I don't think any of these ideas are wild or repugnant to half of the country. Some of these ideas got Biden elected. 

My God man, so you want the 1% ers to pay for everything here?  Do you want to take any responsibility for all the pie in the sky crap you think you are entitles to?

How about gender reassignment surgery?  Should we just go through life having someone else pay for your every whim?

Do you think the 1% ers are going to stick around if you *Tax the hell out of them*?

Open borders?  Really?  How do you respect a person who doesn’t respect you?  Are you willing to house and feed at least some of these immigrants yourself?  You know, some self sacrifice and not shove it off on the government?  Instead of virtue signaling, do the work.

When was the last time the government had a plan to run anything and it turned out well?  It surely wasn’t Biden’s plan to shut down the virus.

A hard disagree.

ETA:

 

 

Edited December 29, 2021 by I_M4_AU

[aubiefifty 18,321]

On 12/28/2021 at 6:26 AM, DKW 86 said:

Absolute truth here: I think the Dems are all but blind to anything that doesnt appeal to their donor class. They have been doing little more for four years than SCREAMING RUSSIANS!!!!!! & TRUMP!!!!!

They have totally forgotten the middle class, the Indies, the Progs. They serve their masters on Wall Street and nothing more. They cant see this at all. This is why McAuliffe can run in Blue VA and lose and the DNC blames the voters. If the DNC keeps going the way they are now, NO POLICIES, just screaming TRUMP!!!! for the 2022 Cycle, I am afraid that they are going to be on the correct side of history, but still get wiped out in 2022 and inadvertently setting the stage for Trump to possibly run and win again in 2024. Right now, I am hoping that trump succumbs to his poor health asap. That may be the only way that trump doesnt get back to the WH. The DNC is making every possible mistake they can because they only listen to their donors these days. They dont care what the Deplorables need or want. You cannot win elections by screaming that "the other guys are worse!"

You have to give people reasons to vote FOR you. "We arent trump." is a losers campaign.  

The Progs are so mad that the Dems betrayed them over Minimum Wage, M4A, etc that they may just sit this one out. Both of these issues got thrown under the bus without a whimper. 

i love you bro but you have been giving us hell about the russia thing for a couple of years now so could i suggest you let that go as well? we get it. also lots of folks get traction screaming commie this or socialist that when we bring up things to the point it scares most older voters away from stuff like free health care. we are the only hold out of all the relevant industrialized nations that do not have it. and it works fine for them. and i have a close friend just retired from their healthcare as a nurse and she said do not believe the rumors that it is fact top notch. and are you the one i think wanting to let trump alone now or back during the impeachments? do you realize how close to stealing the election he actually came? pence is the only one who stood up and i believed he saved this country for the time being. i am not a huge fan of pence but i respect him now more than i did. he put the country ahead of trump and i applaud him. the next time it is tried maybe whoever does it gets it right? then at worst they take over or we have fighting in the streets. those guys should be in prison doing hard labor. trump, bannon, and all involved. and if rolling stone was right the maga's storming the country actually helped the country survive this because they apparently never dreamed it would get violent. i was going to post the article but too many people made fun of me posting articles on the fam trying to help so no more for this ol boy.

[aubiefifty 18,321]

52 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

My God man, so you want the 1% ers to pay for everything here?  Do you want to take any responsibility for all the pie in the sky crap you think you are entitles to?

How about gender reassignment surgery?  Should we just go through life having someone else pay for your every whim?

Do you think the 1% ers are going to stick around if you *Tax the hell out of them*?

Open borders?  Really?  How do you respect a person who doesn’t respect you?  Are you willing to house and feed at least some of these immigrants yourself?  You know, some self sacrifice and not shove it off on the government?  Instead of virtue signaling, do the work.

When was the last time the government had a plan to run anything and it turned out well?  It surely wasn’t Biden’s plan to shut down the virus.

A hard disagree.

ETA:

 

 

everyone should pay their fair share of taxes. make it twenty percent and make everyone pay no exceptions then this country would not be broke. and lets not forget the ones wanting a living wage which we refuse to do for the most part. so then we bail out those huge corps giving medical and housing and food stamps and the ones paying taxes have to foot the bill. and if lower income folks did not have to have both parents working a job and some of them two then we have more spouses at home monitoring kids who start doing crap like gang banging and other criminal activity. too many corps are too greedy and it hurts this country. you know how many old people work quick food now? and in case you have not noticed the corps are running this country and have pretty much run it in the ground. hell the big war machine kills our kids in needless wars for profit and they could care less. nam. iraq. name me one country in the middle east we have not bombed or damn near destroyed. we spend money building those countries back up or most of them while our own country suffers. and what about churches? why do they pay no taxes? do you think this is fair because you go to church? these cats buy expensive vacation homes and own several private jets. what about the folks that do not go to church? now i am not saying ALL churches look to game the system but many do.church attendance is on a downward trend and there is a reason for that. and i know you are mad reading this. there is a pastor in a local church who was running for office and claimed he had video of his opponent and her boyfriend. it was a lie. another church told their members to donate a piece of jewelry because jesus told him to in a dream.  those are in fact true stories. churches around here or at least the big ones are super greedy. it is the small neighborhood churches that have food give a ways and stuff. when is the last time you saw a church have a church dinner for the homeless.maybe i was told wrong but it is my understanding that church meals used to be for the homeless so they would get at least one decent meal a week. so lets get all the folks to blame for not paying their fair share of taxes and not just the folks on the left. and for the record i am not trying to make you mad i am trying to get you to see some things in a different light is all. this is why i call myself a struggling christian because i will not be played in the name of god and you can not believe it but it is happening all over this country.my main reason is an old gf started church in white plains and in less than a month she comes out saying all libs are evil. and i know her well and she learned this in church. ,y oldest friend is a pastor and he has told me more than once the church has broken his heart. he quit preaching altho he was mostly a fill in. and he is now in his fifth or sixth church because he wants a church that does it right. so what do you think?

[I_M4_AU 8,981]

On 12/29/2021 at 12:34 PM, aubiefifty said:

so what do you think?

Everybody should pay their fair share in taxes to keep services going.  There is a balancing act in that throughout the years the tax code changes and deductions are added and taken away to the point a person (corporation) has to hire accountants to figure out how to pay as little tax as they can.  It’s the American way.  Those corporations are required to post their taxes and individuals believe they are getting away with not paying taxes.  A lot of times the corporations have sweet heart deals from local governments to pay not taxes and the general population has no clue those deals exist.

The military is just as necessary as the police.  The US has taken on the role of the world’s police, whether we like it or not, and other countries have gotten accustomed to this.  In recent years we have asked other countries to pay their fair share to NATO and it has helped.  This is not a problem that can be corrected in the short term.  It will need years to correct and it will take several terms of the President to be singularly focused to get the job done.  In other words, both a Democrat and Republican President will have to agree how to proceed.  This may not happen under the present environment.

There are many churches that do the Lord’s work in the correct way.  It would be a-shame to penalize them for the sins of some.  Some churches do get too political and the separation of church and state should work both ways, but it never will.

ETA:

 

 

Edited December 30, 2021 by I_M4_AU

[aubiefifty 18,321]

20 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Everybody should pay their fair share in taxes to keep services going.  There is a balancing act in that throughout the years the tax code changes and deductions are added and taken away to the point a person (corporation) has to hire accountants to figure out how to pay as little tax as they can.  It’s the American way.  Those corporations are required to post their taxes and individuals believe they are getting away with not paying taxes.  A lot of times the corporations have sweet heart deals from local governments to pay not taxes and the general population has no clue those deals exist.

The military is just as necessary as the police.  The US has taken on the role of the world’s police, whether we like it or not, and other countries have gotten accustomed to this.  In recent years we have asked other countries to pay their fair share to NATO and it has helped.  This is not a problem that can be corrected in the short term.  It will need years to correct and it will take several terms of the President to be singularly focused to get the job done.  In other words, both a Democrat and Republican President will have to agree how to proceed.  This may not happen under the present environment.

There are many churches that do the Lord’s work in the correct way.  It would be a-shame to penalize them for the sins of some.  Some churches do get too political and the separation of church and state should work both ways, but it never will.

ETA:

 

 

i am not for penalizing the churches that do it right for the record. i want to be clear on that just in case i was not. i know people use the churches as well. i have heard so many stories from my friend that is a preacher that makes me ashamed.

[cbo 8,832]

On 12/29/2021 at 8:12 AM, I_M4_AU said:

My God man, so you want the 1% ers to pay for everything here?  

I listed two items that cost money and four that generate or save money. I want the 1% to pay for some of it. We can also swipe a few bucks from the 1 trillion dollar annual spend on defense. We always seem to find money when we want to spend it. The NYPD costs $10 billion a year to operate. That seems a little high. 

Do you want to take any responsibility for all the pie in the sky crap you think you are entitles to?

Not a single item I listed would benefit me financially or personally, so don't assume I am entitled. 

How about gender reassignment surgery?  

This seems a bit random, but go ahead and get in all your personal gripes. But sure, why not. 

Should we just go through life having someone else pay for your every whim?

Literally no one has ever said this. We are talking about healthcare and education. Most other countries have figured it out. 

Do you think the 1% ers are going to stick around if you *Tax the hell out of them*?

Yes. You guys want to make America great again. How about the 1950s, when a healthy middle class could actually exist. The top federal income tax rate was 91%. I'm not even asking for that, but there is a precedence. I don't recall a mass exodus of the rich. 

Open borders?  Really?  How do you respect a person who doesn’t respect you?  

Wait, who doesn't respect me? What are you even on about here. 

Are you willing to house and feed at least some of these immigrants yourself?  

How about we pay a living wage to the vast majority who are eager to work hard. Then they can house and feed themselves. 

You know, some self sacrifice and not shove it off on the government?  Instead of virtue signaling, do the work.

You assume virtue signaling because you can't imagine a group of people that actually care about the less fortunate. 

When was the last time the government had a plan to run anything and it turned out well?

So we should just pack it in, rather than push for improvement?

 It surely wasn’t Biden’s plan to shut down the virus.

Biden hasn't done a great job, but it is difficult when a large percentage of the country fights common sense precautions every step of the way. 

A hard disagree.

ETA:

Ted Cruz is a national embarrassment and does not care about you. 

 

 

[I_M4_AU 8,981]

15 minutes ago, cbo said:

I listed two items that cost money and four that generate or save money. I want the 1% to pay for some of it. We can also swipe a few bucks from the 1 trillion dollar annual spend on defense. We always seem to find money when we want to spend it. The NYPD costs $10 billion a year to operate. That seems a little high. 

This is a far cry from *tax the hell out them*.  I’m sure Biden has something up his sleeve to increase their contribution without killing the golden goose.  I have no idea what it takes to fund our military, but it is a necessary evil.  We are the world’s police whether we like it or not.  We have been trying to get other countries to pay their fair share to NATO so that should help.  See if Biden will keep it up.  Defunding the police is a bad idea as we have seen crime rates go up in the cities that tried this.  One of the key functions of government is protecting its citizens.

26 minutes ago, cbo said:

Not a single item I listed would benefit me financially or personally, so don't assume I am entitled.

I would guess then, that you don't have any student loans.  Is this correct?  Student loans are an investment in your future.  Most people have somehow managed to pay these off without government assistance.  To the people who have, what kind of assistance do they get for doing the right thing?

 

31 minutes ago, cbo said:

This seems a bit random, but go ahead and get in all your personal gripes. But sure, why not. 

Literally no one has ever said this. We are talking about healthcare and education. Most other countries have figured it out. 

Why not?  The better question is; Why?  By the virtue of paying for a sex change because a person believes he is a she is literally a whim.  How many times have a lefty like yourself started off talking about healthcare and education and transformed it into something unrecognizable?

Some countries do have different systems than ours, but it doesn’t make it automatically better.  A discussion would be warranted here.

38 minutes ago, cbo said:

Wait, who doesn't respect me? What are you even on about here. 

How about we pay a living wage to the vast majority who are eager to work hard. Then they can house and feed themselves. 

A person who illegally enters a country and his/her first act is to disrespect the protocol to enter into your country is disrespecting you.  Sorry you missed the reference.

Paying a living wage would be great.  What is a living wage?  I know it was defined back when it didn’t cost much to get by, but now….who knows?  Wages are a commodity in so supply and demand have a lot to do with what businesses are willing to pay.  Or are you suggesting the government should tell businesses what to pay their labor force?  These are not easy fixes and the border is being overwhelmed, something should be done.

59 minutes ago, cbo said:

You assume virtue signaling because you can't imagine a group of people that actually care about the less fortunate. 

I can imagine people caring about the less fortunate and churches, food banks, etc do a great job.  It’s the people that give lip service to the problem and do nothing to help the less fortunate that are virtue signalers.  That includes people that just want to throw somebody else’s money at the problem and wash their hands of the issue.

 

1 hour ago, cbo said:

So we should just pack it in, rather than push for improvement?

If you want something done efficiently, give it to the private sector.  A great example is the vaccine.

 

1 hour ago, cbo said:

Biden hasn't done a great job, but it is difficult when a large percentage of the country fights common sense precautions every step of the way.

That is what every President faces when they come into office.  Biden has not been able to pull this country together like he promised.

[cbo 8,832]

7 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

 I have no idea what it takes to fund our military, but it is a necessary evil.  

I just told you. It's over a trillion dollars a year. It's too much. 

I would guess then, that you don't have any student loans.  Is this correct?  Student loans are an investment in your future.  Most people have somehow managed to pay these off without government assistance.  To the people who have, what kind of assistance do they get for doing the right thing?

Correct, my student loans are paid off. I have been fortunate to have solid employment with no gaps. I don't need a reward for that. 

Why not?  The better question is; Why?  By the virtue of paying for a sex change because a person believes he is a she is literally a whim.  

No one would change their sex on a whim. 

How many times have a lefty like yourself started off talking about healthcare and education and transformed it into something unrecognizable?

Zero times in this conversation. But that's what you just tried to do. 

Some countries do have different systems than ours, but it doesn’t make it automatically better.  A discussion would be warranted here.

A person who illegally enters a country and his/her first act is to disrespect the protocol to enter into your country is disrespecting you.  Sorry you missed the reference.

You might be surprised what you would do for yourself and your family if you were in a desperate situation. Has nothing to do with disrespecting American citizens. 

Paying a living wage would be great.  What is a living wage?  I know it was defined back when it didn’t cost much to get by, but now….who knows?  Wages are a commodity in so supply and demand have a lot to do with what businesses are willing to pay.  Or are you suggesting the government should tell businesses what to pay their labor force?  These are not easy fixes and the border is being overwhelmed, something should be done.

You already know we've had a minimum wage for a very long time, so it's not new for the gov to tell businesses what to pay their labor force. Of course they have plenty of latitude beyond the minimum. It just needs to be higher. It's not as complicated as you are making it. 

I can imagine people caring about the less fortunate and churches, food banks, etc do a great job.  It’s the people that give lip service to the problem and do nothing to help the less fortunate that are virtue signalers.  That includes people that just want to throw somebody else’s money at the problem and wash their hands of the issue.

I don't know why you would assume that applies to me or any other individual. 

If you want something done efficiently, give it to the private sector.  A great example is the vaccine.

I doubt the private sector will do what is right/best for the American people vs. increasing their profits. 

That is what every President faces when they come into office.  Biden has not been able to pull this country together like he promised.

Agreed

 

[aubiefifty 18,321]

On 12/28/2021 at 10:16 PM, DKW 86 said:

Man, that felt like a nice cool shower on a hot summer day.

oh so now i am just chopped liver am i?

[DKW 86 7,914]

3 hours ago, aubiefifty said:

oh so now i am just chopped liver am i?

Well, he said: and I responded 

Medicare for all 

Cancel student loan debt (Cancel the first $20K?) 

Defund (not abolish!) the police (We need to REFORM the Police) 

Legalize marijuana 

Tax the hell out of the 1% 

Quit bombing other countries 

Open the borders or at least treat immigrants with some modicum of respect 

Modify or eliminate corporate campaign contributions 

I don't think any of these ideas are wild or repugnant to half of the country. Some of these ideas got Biden elected. 

For the record, I believe we are better with Biden in office than Trump. But that's an incredibly low bar. 

Time for the Democrats to step up and actually do something. 

Edited December 31, 2021 by DKW 86

[I_M4_AU 8,981]

18 hours ago, cbo said:

I just told you. It's over a trillion dollars a year. It's too much. 

Are you in the Pentagon?  Do you know how much it takes to fund the military or is this an opinion?  I could see it being cut to some degree, but I also believe America needs to be the leader of the free world and that requires a strong military. 

18 hours ago, cbo said:

Correct, my student loans are paid off. I have been fortunate to have solid employment with no gaps. I don't need a reward for that. 

Good for you.  Your reward is working hard and doing the right thing.  Why would the people that haven’t/can’t pay their debts be rewarded at the tax payer’s expense?

18 hours ago, cbo said:

No one would change their sex on a whim. 

Do you believe a 4 YO has the capability to a make gender life changing decisions by themselves?  Or does it require a *parent/guardian* to help them along.  4 YOs thru adolescence children make decisions on whims all the time and if encouraged they can become a devastating decision.  If, however, you want a sex change as an adult, have at it, just don’t make me pay for it.

 

19 hours ago, cbo said:

Zero times in this conversation.

That statement was not limited to this conversation.  If you don’t want to answer the question that’s fine.

19 hours ago, cbo said:

You might be surprised what you would do for yourself and your family if you were in a desperate situation. Has nothing to do with disrespecting American citizens. 

I have been in desperate situations before, but I didn’t feel the need to disrespect the law.  I guess it all depends on your perception of desperate is.  Somehow, there have been 2 million people in desperate situations this year alone.  Last year, not even half that amount.  I wonder what changed?

19 hours ago, cbo said:

It's not as complicated as you are making it. 

The minimum wage is still below the promised $15/hr and that fight still looms, but sure it is complicated. We have 11 million jobs available and American citizens are not returning to work at the rate expected.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/20/6-reasons-why-americans-arent-returning-to-work.html

From the article linked;

“The big question is, why aren’t companies bidding up wages and working conditions fast enough to pull people off the sidelines?” Sojourner said./

We are living in unpredictable times.

20 hours ago, cbo said:

I don't know why you would assume that applies to me or any other individual. 

Don’t assume statements are directed at you personally.  To the other individuals; in general, people want to throw tax dollars at a problem and hope it goes away.  For the most part, that hasn’t happened.

20 hours ago, cbo said:

I doubt the private sector will do what is right/best for the American people vs. increasing their profits. 

Big Phrama had a profit motive to get the vaccine available in record time, but it got the job done.  The enticement was probably worth it, time will tell.

Some things are not worth the effort for the private sector.  Recyclables as an example; in my area we started with paper, plastic and glass pickup at your residence.  Then the companies restricted the color of glass, then eliminated glass altogether.  The only ones that will take glass now are the ones at the dump.

It’s not a panacea, but somethings can be done better by the private sector rather than rely on government bureaucrats.

[cbo 8,832]

On 12/31/2021 at 10:54 AM, I_M4_AU said:

Are you in the Pentagon?  Do you know how much it takes to fund the military or is this an opinion?  I could see it being cut to some degree, but I also believe America needs to be the leader of the free world and that requires a strong military. 

Good for you.  Your reward is working hard and doing the right thing.  Why would the people that haven’t/can’t pay their debts be rewarded at the tax payer’s expense?

Do you believe a 4 YO has the capability to a make gender life changing decisions by themselves?  Or does it require a *parent/guardian* to help them along.  4 YOs thru adolescence children make decisions on whims all the time and if encouraged they can become a devastating decision.  If, however, you want a sex change as an adult, have at it, just don’t make me pay for it.

 

That statement was not limited to this conversation.  If you don’t want to answer the question that’s fine.

I have been in desperate situations before, but I didn’t feel the need to disrespect the law.  I guess it all depends on your perception of desperate is.  Somehow, there have been 2 million people in desperate situations this year alone.  Last year, not even half that amount.  I wonder what changed?

The minimum wage is still below the promised $15/hr and that fight still looms, but sure it is complicated. We have 11 million jobs available and American citizens are not returning to work at the rate expected.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/20/6-reasons-why-americans-arent-returning-to-work.html

From the article linked;

“The big question is, why aren’t companies bidding up wages and working conditions fast enough to pull people off the sidelines?” Sojourner said./

We are living in unpredictable times.

Don’t assume statements are directed at you personally.  To the other individuals; in general, people want to throw tax dollars at a problem and hope it goes away.  For the most part, that hasn’t happened.

Big Phrama had a profit motive to get the vaccine available in record time, but it got the job done.  The enticement was probably worth it, time will tell.

Some things are not worth the effort for the private sector.  Recyclables as an example; in my area we started with paper, plastic and glass pickup at your residence.  Then the companies restricted the color of glass, then eliminated glass altogether.  The only ones that will take glass now are the ones at the dump.

It’s not a panacea, but somethings can be done better by the private sector rather than rely on government bureaucrats.

I can't respond to all this. It's just too much and this is starting to feel pointless. 

But the one thing that jumped out at me was the bizarre scenario of a 4 year old changing gender without assistance from a parent/guardian. Where does this stuff come from? How do you expect to have an honest conversation when you throw this out? Why did you bring this up in the first place?

I can deal with policy disagreements, but one thing that absolutely drives me mad is the bizarre obsession with anyone who is different. Why not let people do whatever the hell they want, as long as they aren't hurting anyone?

And please don't obfuscate a serious issue with imaginary scenarios. It's just like gay marriage a few years back, when the right would say things like "next thing we know ducks will be getting married." Where are all the married ducks, IM4AU? SHOW ME THE MARRIED DUCKS!

[I_M4_AU 8,981]

13 hours ago, cbo said:

But the one thing that jumped out at me was the bizarre scenario of a 4 year old changing gender without assistance from a parent/guardian.

You misinterpreted what I wrote.  I clearly said: “Do you believe a 4 YO has the capability to a make gender life changing decisions by themselves?  The answer, of course in NO they can’t.  Or does it require a *parent/guardian* to help them along”.  There are a few parents/guardians that take it upon themselves to misinterpret a child’s whims too seriously and gender assign for their child.

13 hours ago, cbo said:

And please don't obfuscate a serious issue with imaginary scenarios. It's just like gay marriage a few years back

Does it ever stop at just the right for gays to marry?  I personally believe gays have a right to marry if they so choose, but when a it turns into a way to harm individuals that believe the sanctity of marriage is between a man and a women it becomes a battleground.  See the Denver, Co baker.  He won his case and then people started asking for gender reassignment cakes, etc. and he is nearly bankrupt for sticking to his beliefs.

The SCOTUS has even included trans in the civil rights act.  Yes, there is a thing called the slippery slope.

Happy New Year and welcome to the Political Forum.

 

Edited January 2, 2022 by I_M4_AU
Clarification

[cbo 8,832]

On 1/2/2022 at 6:45 AM, I_M4_AU said:

Does it ever stop at just the right for gays to marry?  I personally believe gays have a right to marry if they so choose, but when a it turns into a way to harm individuals that believe the sanctity of marriage is between a man and a women it becomes a battleground.  See the Denver, Co baker.  He won his case and then people started asking for gender reassignment cakes, etc. and he is nearly bankrupt for sticking to his beliefs.

 

If he's bankrupt, that's what he gets for acting like an a**hole. People often quit going to restaurants or businesses if the employees are rude. Sounds like the courts let him do what he wants and he dug his own grave. 

 

 

[I_M4_AU 8,981]

2 hours ago, cbo said:

If he's bankrupt, that's what he gets for acting like an a**hole. People often quit going to restaurants or businesses if the employees are rude. Sounds like the courts let him do what he wants and he dug his own grave. 

 

 

Well, it looks like we disagree on this subject too.  It appears to me, the so called oppressed do not want things equal, they way revenge.

[CoffeeTiger 5,914]

On 1/2/2022 at 8:45 AM, I_M4_AU said:

Does it ever stop at just the right for gays to marry?  I personally believe gays have a right to marry if they so choose, but when a it turns into a way to harm individuals that believe the sanctity of marriage is between a man and a women it becomes a battleground.  See the Denver, Co baker.  He won his case and then people started asking for gender reassignment cakes, etc. and he is nearly bankrupt for sticking to his beliefs.

 

So gay people get outlawed, discriminated against, beaten, mocked, and killed for hundreds of years, and now that they recently have some equal rights in society the "sanctity of marriage" folks want to cry foul that they are being attacked because society is "forcing" them to treat gay people as equals? Give me a break. 

 

Everyone has the freedom to believe and worship what and where they wish, but as a society we are changing to where it's no longer acceptable to use your religious beliefs as a excuse to discriminate or mistreat other people, and too many Christians view their newfound inability to discriminate as a direct attack on them and their beliefs. 

 

On 1/2/2022 at 8:45 AM, I_M4_AU said:

The SCOTUS has even included trans in the civil rights act.  Yes, there is a thing called the slippery slope.

 

 

The SCOTUS even made it illegal to discriminate against Trans people too? The horror! 

It is a slippery slope indeed. You start giving some people freedoms and suddenly other people want it too. I think we should personally go back to Feudalism. Strip everyone's rights away and just start over from a simpler time. 

[I_M4_AU 8,981]

14 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

So gay people get outlawed, discriminated against, beaten, mocked, and killed for hundreds of years, and now that they recently have some equal rights in society the "sanctity of marriage" folks want to cry foul that they are being attacked because society is "forcing" them to treat gay people as equals? Give me a break. 

The discrimination of gays around the world was (and is in the parts of the world they are still discriminated against) a terrible thing and laws have changed to protect these individuals. In June of 2015 the SCOTUS granted the rights of gays to marry which is also a step in the right direction.

The Denver Bakery incident is when some people wanted to force the baker to perform his artistry when his religious beliefs would not allow him to do so.  He politely told them he couldn’t bake the couple a cake for religious reason.  If he was the only baker in town, I could see them taking this to court, but he wasn’t.

long story short; does one person’s right outweigh another person’s right?  So your *forcing* them to treat gay people as equals is off.  This was seen when others tried to sue the baker for not baking a gender reassignment cake.

While the Masterpiece Cakeshop, in Lakewood, said they could make a birthday cake for the desired number of people, baker Jack Phillips said he could not make this particular cake because of its message.

The judge, who said this is about refusing to sell a product and not about compelled speech, also ordered Phillips to pay Scardina $500. Phillips plans to appeal.

Citing religious beliefs, Phillips made a similar argument in 2012 when he refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple. The couple filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission.

The case eventually made its way to the Supreme Court, which partially sided with Phillip saying the Civil Rights Commission showed hostility toward religion.

https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/masterpiece-cakeshop-baker-discrimination-gender-transition-cake-transgender-colroado/73-a75c4069-ae18-489b-bfa2-6b7a148c085a

33 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Everyone has the freedom to believe and worship what and where they wish, but as a society we are changing to where it's no longer acceptable to use your religious beliefs as a excuse to discriminate or mistreat other people, and too many Christians view their newfound inability to discriminate as a direct attack on them and their beliefs.

The SCOTUS disagrees with your statement.  Once again, if this bakery was the one bakery in 100 miles, I could see their case.  If someone doesn’t want your business, why force the issue?  Just cancel him on social media and be done with it.  Isn’t that how it works?

 

38 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

The SCOTUS even made it illegal to discriminate against Trans people too? The horror! 

The SCOTUS basically made legislation with their decision.  This was the dissenting view was: 

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., in a dissent joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, wrote that the majority had abandoned its judicial role.

“There is only one word for what the court has done today: legislation,” Justice Alito wrote. “The document that the court releases is in the form of a judicial opinion interpreting a statute, but that is deceptive.”

“A more brazen abuse of our authority to interpret statutes is hard to recall,” he wrote. “The court tries to convince readers that it is merely enforcing the terms of the statute, but that is preposterous.”

The common understanding of sex discrimination in 1964, Justice Alito wrote, was bias against women or men and did not encompass discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. If Congress wanted to protect gay and transgender workers, he wrote, it could pass a new law.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/15/us/gay-transgender-workers-supreme-court.html

We have differing views on this matter.

 

[CoffeeTiger 5,914]

16 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

The discrimination of gays around the world was (and is in the parts of the world they are still discriminated against) a terrible thing and laws have changed to protect these individuals. In June of 2015 the SCOTUS granted the rights of gays to marry which is also a step in the right direction.

The Denver Bakery incident is when some people wanted to force the baker to perform his artistry when his religious beliefs would not allow him to do so.  He politely told them he couldn’t bake the couple a cake for religious reason.  If he was the only baker in town, I could see them taking this to court, but he wasn’t.

long story short; does one person’s right outweigh another person’s right?  So your *forcing* them to treat gay people as equals is off.  This was seen when others tried to sue the baker for not baking a gender reassignment cake.

While the Masterpiece Cakeshop, in Lakewood, said they could make a birthday cake for the desired number of people, baker Jack Phillips said he could not make this particular cake because of its message.

The judge, who said this is about refusing to sell a product and not about compelled speech, also ordered Phillips to pay Scardina $500. Phillips plans to appeal.

Citing religious beliefs, Phillips made a similar argument in 2012 when he refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple. The couple filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission.

The case eventually made its way to the Supreme Court, which partially sided with Phillip saying the Civil Rights Commission showed hostility toward religion.

 

Yes, Some rights do outweigh other peoples rights. Example in point is that when gay marriage was legalized there were examples of clerks and other government officials who still refused to issue marriage certificates to gay people because it would violate their religious beliefs and convictions. 

They were either fired or jailed or both. 

The right for gay people to marry overrode other peoples rights to deny them services based on their deep religious convictions. 

It's not off to say religious people are mad that they have to treat gays and trans people as equal because that's exactly what is and has happened all over America. It's why the religious right opposed legalized gay marriage to begin with, and why some of them continued to try and deny gay people services after it was legalized.  

Quote

https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/masterpiece-cakeshop-baker-discrimination-gender-transition-cake-transgender-colroado/73-a75c4069-ae18-489b-bfa2-6b7a148c085a

The SCOTUS disagrees with your statement.  Once again, if this bakery was the one bakery in 100 miles, I could see their case.  If someone doesn’t want your business, why force the issue?  Just cancel him on social media and be done with it.  Isn’t that how it works?

You are twisting yourself into a pretzel saying "Well, if they had other nearby options to get a cake then that would make it okay for the baker to discriminate, but if he was the only baker around then I could see it being taken to court" -What do you mean? Either it's okay to deny people services based on religious beliefs or it is not okay. "Well they had other options" isn't a good defense when we're talking about legality and discrimination.  

If you want to live in a society where you can discriminate and deny services to other people based only on religious beliefs then you don't need to operate a business in America, Europe, or any civilized society really. 

There are still plenty of places around Asia, Africa, and the Middle East that are more than happy to let Religion be the basis of law. But In many of those places American Christianity probably wouldn't be too welcome, and you'd find yourself the one being discriminated against.

Quote

The SCOTUS basically made legislation with their decision.  This was the dissenting view was: 

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., in a dissent joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, wrote that the majority had abandoned its judicial role.

“There is only one word for what the court has done today: legislation,” Justice Alito wrote. “The document that the court releases is in the form of a judicial opinion interpreting a statute, but that is deceptive.”

“A more brazen abuse of our authority to interpret statutes is hard to recall,” he wrote. “The court tries to convince readers that it is merely enforcing the terms of the statute, but that is preposterous.”

The common understanding of sex discrimination in 1964, Justice Alito wrote, was bias against women or men and did not encompass discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. If Congress wanted to protect gay and transgender workers, he wrote, it could pass a new law.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/15/us/gay-transgender-workers-supreme-court.html

We have differing views on this matter.

 

The SCOTUS as a whole disagreed with Alito and Thomas here. 

 

And the SCOTUS never said the baker had the right to deny services, they made a limited ruling stating they believed the commission that ruled against the baker was too biased against the bakers religious beliefs when hearing the case and threw it out based on that point alone. 

Edited January 4, 2022 by CoffeeTiger

[I_M4_AU 8,981]

2 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Yes, Some rights do outweigh other peoples rights. Example in point is that when gay marriage was legalized there were examples of clerks and other government officials who still refused to issue marriage certificates to gay people because it would violate their religious beliefs and convictions. 

They were either fired or jailed or both. 

This is an apples to oranges comparison.  Those people you cited were government employees and were required by law to their jobs and should have been fired.  The baker is a private citizen and does not fall under the jurisdiction of government if he has a valid right of refusal, which he did.

2 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

twisting yourself into a pretzel saying "Well, if they had other nearby options to get a cake then that would make it okay for the baker to discriminate, but if he was the only baker around then I could see it being taken to court" -What do you mean? Either it's okay to deny people services based on religious beliefs or it is not okay. "Well they had other options" isn't a good defense when we're talking about legality and discrimination.

The fact the gay couple had options and still wanted to get the local commission involved to fine the baker goes to the motive of the gay couple.  Why was it so necessary that this baker capitulate to the gay couple’s wishes?

2 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

If you want to live in a society where you can discriminate and deny services to other people based only on religious beliefs then you don't need to operate a business in America, Europe, or any civilized society really. 

He was exercising his rights, which is still under the Constitution in America, so you can’t lump other civilized societies in to this equation.  Only the United States has a Constitution for as long as we don’t erode its meaning.

2 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

There are still plenty of places around Asia, Africa, and the Middle East that are more than happy to let Religion be the basis of law. But In many of those places American Christianity probably wouldn't be too welcome, and you'd find yourself the one being discriminated against.

This is why the oppressed so desperately want to come to America.  We are a land that has separation of Church and State at the federal level.  It is also the reason most of the founders fled places like England and Europe in general to come here and develop the Constitution.  I know it may be hard to believe, but there are no oppressed people in the United States of America compared to the rest of the world.

2 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

The SCOTUS as a whole disagreed with Alito and Thomas here. 

 

And the SCOTUS never said the baker had the right to deny services, they made a limited ruling stating they believed the commission that ruled against the baker was too biased against the bakers religious beliefs when hearing the case and threw it out based on that point alone. 

You are correct about disagreeing, but my point was that the SCOTUS overstepped their bounds by becoming political and allowing Gay and Trans people to be folded in with the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  In 1964 there were only 2 genders, male and female, and for the majority of the SCOTUS to make legislation that should have been left to Congress is wrong IMO.  This is why the appointment of judges have been so political.  What Clearance Thomas went through at the hands of Joe Biden was pitiful (and racist).

Your comments about the SCOTUS’ limited ruling is correct and is the reason he has a target on his back to this day.  If the SCOTUS had a backbone this could have ended.

[CoffeeTiger 5,914]

The gay couple having an ulterior motive to get the Baker in trouble (if they did have that) doesn't automatically make the Baker right to refuse service to them based on their sexual preferences. 

You shouldn't be able to refuse service to Christians based on their Christianity even if you disagree with it or even if you are a practicing Satanist, and Christians shouldn't be able to refuse service to gays, Muslims, trans, etc.

It shouldn't, and IMO, doesn't matter if they have "other options" or not. We as a society shouldn't allow legal discrimination based on religious beliefs. 

That's my point and I don't believe Christians HAVE a constitutionally guaranteed right to refuse service to those their religion disagrees with. If people DID have that right, it would be misused and abused just like the "religious medical exemptions" are, which is why those laws are starting to be phased out. 

 

Religious beliefs are unique because they can be literally anything and everything and there really isn't a good way to verify the validity or sincerity of ones beliefs aside from just taking someone at their own word. 

[AuburnNTexas 7,336]

59 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

The gay couple having an ulterior motive to get the Baker in trouble (if they did have that) doesn't automatically make the Baker right to refuse service to them based on their sexual preferences. 

You shouldn't be able to refuse service to Christians based on their Christianity even if you disagree with it or even if you are a practicing Satanist, and Christians shouldn't be able to refuse service to gays, Muslims, trans, etc.

It shouldn't, and IMO, doesn't matter if they have "other options" or not. We as a society shouldn't allow legal discrimination based on religious beliefs. 

That's my point and I don't believe Christians HAVE a constitutionally guaranteed right to refuse service to those their religion disagrees with. If people DID have that right, it would be misused and abused just like the "religious medical exemptions" are, which is why those laws are starting to be phased out. 

 

Religious beliefs are unique because they can be literally anything and everything and there really isn't a good way to verify the validity or sincerity of ones beliefs aside from just taking someone at their own word. 

The Gay couple had used this Baker before and the Baker did not refuse them service. It was only when they requested a particular cake that went against the Bakers belief's that he refused to bake it. So the Baker did not refuse them service he just refused service on this one item.  If the Baker had said I won't serve you period because you are gay then that would have been discrimination.

[CoffeeTiger 5,914]

1 hour ago, AuburnNTexas said:

The Gay couple had used this Baker before and the Baker did not refuse them service. It was only when they requested a particular cake that went against the Bakers belief's that he refused to bake it. So the Baker did not refuse them service he just refused service on this one item.  If the Baker had said I won't serve you period because you are gay then that would have been discrimination.

That's not how you define discrimination.

There also wasn't a specific cake design or particular cake ever discussed. They told the baker they wanted a cake to celebrate their wedding and the baker told them he doesn't make makes for gay marriages or marriage celebrations...period full stop. That's textbook discrimination. 

If you offer a service of custom cake baking/decoration for weddings, but say that you only offer that service to straight couples and not gay couples then that's discrimination. 

 

[homersapien 12,264]

4 hours ago, AuburnNTexas said:

The Gay couple had used this Baker before and the Baker did not refuse them service. It was only when they requested a particular cake that went against the Bakers belief's that he refused to bake it. So the Baker did not refuse them service he just refused service on this one item.  If the Baker had said I won't serve you period because you are gay then that would have been discrimination.

Yeah, it's all about the cake.  

They should have told him we aren't really gay, it's a joke for a dinner party we are having.

 

[Grumps 3,706]

21 hours ago, homersapien said:

Yeah, it's all about the cake.  

They should have told him we aren't really gay, it's a joke for a dinner party we are having.

 

Or he should have said he'd love to make them a cake but was just too busy.