How does this happen? Chick-fil-A branded as anti-gay?

[Asher]

Equal access simply means that the law as it stands does not treat homosexual men differently from heterosexual men. And the law doesn't. Gay men can marry any woman they want to marry, same with straight men. Ergo there is no 'equal access' issues, because both have equal access to the law.

What you are saying is because both can get in through the front door, and gay people want to enter in through a different door - that not giving them the different door is an access issue. No, it's not. It's a fairness issue as Asher will tell you straight off the bat.

Asher believes that all relationships should be recognised as marriage.

Apolyton's favourite disingenuous pedophile strikes again...

[Kidlicious]

Equal access simply means that the law as it stands does not treat homosexual men differently from heterosexual men. And the law doesn't. Gay men can marry any woman they want to marry, same with straight men. Ergo there is no 'equal access' issues, because both have equal access to the law.

What you are saying is because both can get in through the front door, and gay people want to enter in through a different door - that not giving them the different door is an access issue. No, it's not. It's a fairness issue as Asher will tell you straight off the bat.

Asher believes that all relationships should be recognised as marriage.

ARE YOU SERIOOOOOUUUUUSS?!

[Ben Kenobi]

Apolyton's favourite disingenuous pedophile strikes again

So it's ok to call other posters 'pedophiles' now?

[Ben Kenobi]

ARE YOU SERIOOOOOUUUUUSS?!

Person A gets a ballot
Person B gets a ballot.

Person A votes for the person they support.

Person B is unhappy because no one on the ballot represents him.

Is this an access issue? Is person B being discriminated against because nobody on the ballot represents him?

[Flubber]

It's happened before. Marriage photographers who refused to do gay marriages have been hauled before the HRT and told that they have no choice - they have to do them. Which is no different than forcing a delivery driver to deliver to people with a record of non-payment and abuse of delivery drivers. The point being that insofar as the list has inequal outcomes, it's in violation of section 13. Section 13 doesn't care that there's non-payment or abuse. All it cares about is the ratio. If there's more minorities than white folks, then yes, it's racist.

So you made up the previous example while representing it as something that happens. The two things are not at all related and with that i believe I shall adopt the position set out by NYe in post 167 of the bitumen thread.

[Ben Kenobi]

So you made up the previous example while representing it as something that happens.

Uh, people have been fined by the HRCs for refusing to do gay weddings. How is this not the same as what you're talking about here? Forcing businesses to take on clients is wrong. No private enterprise should be forced to take on clients that they do not want.

[MikeH]

So it's ok to call other posters 'pedophiles' now?

No. I've sent Asher a PM warning.

However I see that he was taunted into it by another thread of your relentless homophobia.

And of course private businesses should be forced to accept business from people they don't want. Otherwise you go back to the days of shops with "no blacks" rules. Modern democracies tend to legislate against prejudice, it's one of the great things about them.

And that includes Poly. So please keep your offensive, out of date, homophobic views to yourself.

[Docfeelgood]

No. I've sent Asher a PM warning.

However I see that he was taunted into it by another thread of your relentless homophobia.

And of course private businesses should be forced to accept business from people they don't want. Otherwise you go back to the days of shops with "no blacks" rules. Modern democracies tend to legislate against prejudice, it's one of the great things about them.

And that includes Poly. So please keep your offensive, out of date, homophobic views to yourself.

I don't see a problem with that due to the high crime.

BTW
Here is a little tid bit.
The apartments I now live in was at ( I would say about 60% black ) when I moved in. (When I renewed my lease after a year) they were asking for background checks and anybody with a felony conviction is not allowed to renew their lease.
Now the black population is about 5%- 10%.
Crime rate and disturbances has dropped to almost nothing and as a plus got rid of all those damn pit bulls.

Discrimination?

[Wezil]

A warning about a homophobic rant followed by a little bit of a racist one.

Gotta love Poly.

[Docfeelgood]

There is a lot of other places to talk racism if it is to your liking. A lot more people will agree with you than here.

What I find interesting about being a racist is that people are quick to point out that I am a racist but never ask why I'm a racist.

[Wezil]

[Docfeelgood]

At least I can be truthful with myself. Can you?

[MikeH]

I don't see a problem with that due to the high crime.

BTW
Here is a little tid bit.
The apartments I now live in was at ( I would say about 60% black ) when I moved in. (When I renewed my lease after a year) they were asking for background checks and anybody with a felony conviction is not allowed to renew their lease.
Now the black population is about 5%- 10%.
Crime rate and disturbances has dropped to almost nothing and as a plus got rid of all those damn pit bulls.

Discrimination?

I assume they are excluding criminals whatever their colour or sexual orientation.

I think there are many issues that causes there to be a disproportionally high number of African Americans with felony convictions, but not for this thread.

[MikeH]

There is a lot of other places to talk racism if it is to your liking. A lot more people will agree with you than here.

What I find interesting about being a racist is that people are quick to point out that I am a racist but never ask why I'm a racist.

Why are you a racist?

I'm interested in why Ben is a homophobe too. Not only did he actively chose an anti-gay religion, he also really publically hammers their anti-gay line, even though many Catholics are much more tolerant.

[Ben Kenobi]

However I see that he was taunted into it by another thread of your relentless homophobia.

Did you miss his post where he said, "Ben would believe X"? If he's going to speak for me, then I'm going to respond. Simple as that.

And of course private businesses should be forced to accept business from people they don't want.

Why?

Otherwise you go back to the days of shops with "no blacks" rules.

As opposed to 'no whites'?

Modern democracies tend to legislate against prejudice, it's one of the great things about them.

Why is it necessary? If a business were to put up such a sign saying, "we don't serve blacks", do you believe that they would recieve sufficient patronage? I don't.

I'm confident that the market does not want to see businesses operate in this fashion. Ergo - businesses should be permitted to operate this way, because the market will deal with them if they do.

And that includes Poly. So please keep your offensive, out of date, homophobic views to yourself.

So I'm not allowed to post that homosexuality is sinful?