What the fuck is the problem here?
Look, they don't want to hire faggots in a place where faggotry is believed to be degenerate. Why do they have to be required BY LAW to do something that they believe to be cancerous?
How obnoxious do you have to be to force a Christian to take pictures at your faggot wedding? Get a faggot photographer and he'll do a job just as good or better and there won't be any issues.
Why the fuck should a Christian church that believes faggotry is a sin be required to hire faggots? If my belief tells me that it's a sin to wear red pants every 3rd Tuesday of the month, then why the fuck do I have to be required by law to allow someone to ruin my religion?
Why should some flamboyant faggot ruin my chill little church service? A place where I can get away from all the degenerate billboards, music, movies, illuminati controlled propaganda and faggots.
You're a fag? That's fine. Be gay all you want to. Spread it around all you want to. This is not an issue for you to cry like someone stuck a dick 5 times bigger into your ass than what you expected it to be.
You not being able to get a job or be a person of authority at church, a Christian not wanting to participate in your gay wedding and general protection of someone's belief system does not affect your mentally ill self at all. You wouldn't want to get a job at a church or have a Christian photographer at your faggot ceremony anyway....that is unless you're mentally ill.
>/r9k/ user
>Calling others degenerate
>OP
>Calling others faggots
Irony thy name is...
>being this butthurt about people getting butthurt
>/r9k/ talking about anything but tfw no gf
The best analogy that always shuts people up is that if you went to a Jewish bakery, you wouldn't force them to draw swastikas on cakes you ordered, or have them write God's name.
>>27413235
>Thinking you're being cool and counter-cultural by pretending to be an ultra-conservative serious Christian
Pro-tip: Being a shill to the right-wing religious establishment is no better than being a shill to the left-wing SJW establishment.
You're not wrong in saying that people shouldn't be forced to serve customers/hire employees they do not wish to serve/hire. But trying to coat your argument in words like "degeneracy" and "propaganda" just makes you look like an imbecile.
The law doesn't affect churches
stop talking shit about things you clearly know little about
What's wrong OP
Don't you like, POZ LOADS?
>>27413235
Who gives a fuck about you.
Boipucci >>>>>>>>>> whatever you want in your life.
Employers should not refuse to hire someone because they have a different sexuality
Businesses can refuse service due to someone's sexuality.
>>27413961
>"propaganda"
>Implying "propaganda" is just a buzzword for argument's sake.
>Implying it's not a legitimate tactic governments have used for manipulating things in their way.
>Implying it hasn't been used to convince normies to go to war to kill and die just because the papers said so.
>Implying governments haven't used it to make it seem like another country is preparing to go to war, so other, weaker countries will pay protection money.
>Implying it hasn't been used to influence the masses.
>Implying it's not continued to this day.
>>27413235
Because we're living in a muh feels dictatorship.
Anyone should be able to fire their employees for any fucking reason.
>>27414008
fucking faggot burn in hell
>>27414029
>Employers should not refuse to hire someone because they have a different sexuality
If they refuse to hire the hypothetically best person for the job because of personal reasons then they're free to run the business into the ground
>>27414029
>Employers should not refuse to hire someone because they have a different sexuality
Why not?
>>27414081
Stop repressing your own sexuality due to fear of being called names christfag.
>>27413235
Because your rights end where my feelings begin.
>>27414100
Why do faggots feel the need to accuse others of being faggots too.
Is it because deep down they know faggotry is wrong?
>>27414086
Yeah of course but that doesn't mean a business could stay afloat while also refusing to hire blacks or women or gays or asains or whatever else. Then you have business not giving these people jobs, which means the economy is going down the toilet with skyrocketing unemployment and homelessness. It's just a matter of the average person not doing what is best for the economy overall. Not saying we should force employers to hire these people we just shouldn't allow them to refuse employment based on those characteristics where it isn't applicable to the job.
>>27414131
I bet you're horny at all these sweet qt boys I'm posting.
Stop fooling yourself, this gay hate you have is literally self hate.
>>27414144
Yes, but the answer isn't to hold a gun to their heads and force them to hire them because you are going to create tension and hostility in the workforce.
If anything, another business may pop up that doesn't have qualms over these things and they succeed
>>27414097
It isn't morally right to judge people based on characteristics they were born with and can't control or things that aren't your business (who they're fucking). It is bad for your business to deny the most talented based on those characteristics. It is bad for the economy as a whole due to less workers working.
>>27414029
>Businesses can refuse service due to someone's sexuality.
except when they get sued for doing so
>>27414144
>that doesn't mean a business could stay afloat while also refusing to hire blacks or women or gays or asains or whatever else.
Yes they can. Thats how America prospered.
Fuck outta here you know dont know shit about economics
>>27414144
Maybe I really, really hate niggers and I'll just go around being angry if I'm forced to be around them so I'll run my hypothetical company a lot worse.
>>27414175
Forcing a business to hire someone based on skin color or gender or sexuality is obviously going to far. But enforcing the requirement of evaluating people on merit and skill and not stupid shit is just good for everyone.
>>27414189
That was a typo i meant couldn't
>>27414195
If you're around decent niggers which i assume are the ones you would hire, you would start hating niggers less because you have nigger employees that aren't completely incompetent.
>>27414179
>It isn't morally right to judge people based on characteristics they were born with and can't control or things that aren't your business (who they're fucking).
Neither is affirmative action. But the same people who support AA also oppose these laws. Top hypocrisy.
>its bad for your bussines
No its not and why do you care?
Stop pretending you care about my well being or giva a shit about the econony. Its pathetic.
>>27414245
that is literally what they're doing though.
It should be a business' prerogative to be stupid if they wish so
>>27414261
When did i ever say i supported affirmative action. I've already said it is just going too far. And yeah i do care about the economy because guess what idiot i also participate in the economy. The US economy can only suffer by letting idiots hire based on stupid shit instead of skill.
>>27414097
>>27414086
>>27414188
>>27414189
I agree that businesses should be able to hire whoever they want and refuse to hire whoever they want
but if women, Christians, Muslims, blacks, etc. all get anti-discrimination protection that forces companies to ignore their race or religion or sex then homosexuality should be included in that too
Either no one should have anti-discrimination protection or gays should get the same protection
>>27414274
Yeah but why would we let someone do something that hurts everyone else.
>>27414321
The same reason we don't ban guns or alcohol; it's the price of freedom
>>27414345
Guns can do some good in certain situations though. This doesn't do any good. Also even with all the problems with alcohol it does have a positive effect on society in some ways. The only issue is alcohol abusers and drunk drivers and such.
>>27414375
It would breed competition which usually helps the economy
>>27413235
>let's make a society where people can become second class citizens just because the majority dislike them
That sure will end well for robots.
A business has the right to refuse service. But when they clarify they're excluding that said person for a completely unrelated personal characteristic, then it becomes discrimination. If a black man goes to a bakery and asks for a cake, or goes to a job interview, and is refused the cake/job, he can't do anything about it. The "owner" hasthe right to not service that person if so he wishes. But in the moment he states: I wont sell to you/ hire you because you are black, then it becomes discrimination.
When I was 16 I tried to get in a fancy private school here in my country, one of the best high schools nationwide. The interviwer asked me if I was gay,probably because I'm flamboyant. I said yes, and he said in fancy words the school was not interested in "your type" of student. I asked what type, the gay type? And he answered in euphemisms. Being from a rich family we suedthe shit out of them. Justice is slow here, it took 5 years for the lawsuit to end. Back then the judge sentenced the school to apologize and pay the equivalent of one year of enrolment. It was a nice victory. We had to sign a confidentiality contract though, so nothing came out in the press unfortunately.
>>27413958
Nice falacy there. Comparing a gay to a neo nazi. Your analogy may shut those who don't notice how wrong it is. You inverted the roles of opressed and opressor. Very clever, obviously. But the right analogy would be the reverse:
> a jew goes to a bakery asking for a cake with a inscrption in hebrew and a menorah drawing.
> the owner is "secretly" a neonazi and refuses to make the cake because it's against his beliefs.
We this is 4chinz, nazism central. But in the case I described, most of the civilized world would side with the jew, agreeing that the neonazi is a bigot is using bullshit beliefs to justify the crime of discrimination and prejudice.
It's the same when a religious bigot denies service for a gay person. And many times these services are not even related to gay things
I believe there might be a word for it in german. When the right of one person conflicts the right of the other.
At one hand we have the seller/owner right to work as he pleases, to attend who he wants, to hire who he wants, and obviously to deny the fruits of his work to whoever he wants.
At the other hand we have the buyers/employee right of equality and inclusion, the right to not be discriminated, persecuted or excluded because of his colour, race, beliefs, gender, ideology and sexuality. The right to have access to same commands and services that everyother citizen has.
In this tour the force, only one can win. Who shall be it?
>>27413235
I skim read your post so..
ideally this protection (should) work both ways a company cannot fire you because of your privately held beliefs or political affiliations as long as they don't interfere with the rights of others at your place of employment
You shouldn't fire/not hire someone for being gay but you should fire them if they are behaving inappropriately at work
>>27414471
>But the right analogy would be the reverse
>it should matter to the government the political beliefs of the people involved in a legal dispute
lol have fun
>>27414608
the business owners because it is their property/labor, and so they can sell or keep it as they wish, regardless of why they do so
the right to avoid discrimination should only be relevant in governmental matters, ie public schools, etc. since the government is obligated to be fair amongst its citizens
>>27414831
>we only hire mexicans because they work harder for less pay
>>27414831
>Laws should only be applicable for public matters
> private corporations and business may do as they please.
I hope someone denies you service for being a permavirgin loser one day.
>>27414795
He was the one who stupidly brought "nazist in jewish bakery" first, my lady.
>>27414300
You're community college is showing jr.
>>27414608
I agree that not being persecuted is a right but not being discriminated or excluded is a privilege.
No one has the RIGHT to get served or employed by someone else.
>>27415243
>laws
no, governmental restrictions
in the same way that you can be banned from 4chan without having your free speech violated, business owners should be able to discriminate without violating your right to equal treatment before the law
>>27413235
Businesses shouldn't get to bypass civil rights acts because muh god
>>27416945
civil rights act shouldn't exist as it does now, it bypasses property rights
>>27416562
> business shpuld be able to discriminate without violating the law that forbbid it.
I don't know how it works in burger land, but discrimimation is a crime in my country. The very first paragraph of the constitution for that matter. and no one, not even corporations, are above it.
>>27415553
Every right is a privilege if you want to go down the relativization road. You do have the right to be given an equal chance and treatment in that specific job interview/commercial trade, and not be excluded from it because of who you are (black, gay, female, etc)
>>27414471
Just further proof faggots like you should be rounded up and gassed.
>>27413235
I want /pol/ to leave.
/pol/ doesn't belong on 4chan. It's a board for failed normalfags.
I's such a wildly divergent place from the rest of 4chan.
Literally a containment board for stormfags and middle aged losers that wandered onto this website in 2011. They unironically think they can talk about "degeneracy" on a website where you're one or two clicks away from seeing Japanese girls having hundreds of cockroaches shoved up their vaginas. I bet they don't even like anime.
Nothing but a bunch of late-20s/early 30s white losers that want to be normies but can't because they're too ugly/autist/whatever so they align themselves with their most base characteristics (race) in order to cope with their total lack of real life achievements and autist status.
Stormcels and Trumpcels are easily the most pathetic people on this website.
Moot should've finished the job.
>>27413235
especially after considering the fact that every LGBTMJDOFMIOSDUNI is a (closet) pedophile
>>27417944
>implying your aren't surrounded by robots who are openly pedophiles
>>27417855
You're really dumb and your post is full dumb assumptions.
>>27413235
Just replace all the instances of Christian with white and faggot with black. Then tell me why that's either okay or different.It's neither.
>>27413988
Don't you like, COMMA SPLICES?
A business has the right to refuse, deny, not give service to people for any reason. While they CANNOT actively pursue that person and place restriction outside of their business, they may do anything they desire inside their business. Take injury disclaimers. While it is illegal to assualt someone without consent, a business may inform people that injuries may happen, Tue customer chooses to consent by going through with with the contract. As such, business is outside the law in that it can ask customers consent to act any way that stays inside the business internal workings. Hence you cannot buy or sell drugs, because that is an action involving outside activity. This is also why feminism definition of rape is invalid; if you offer consent of any kind, or "disclaim" the person from their actions beforehand, you cannot then go back and accuse them of actions which were taken during the disclaiming period. So, a business CAN and MAY refuse service or to work with another person FOR ANY REASON, unless they were PREVIOUSLY consented to a BUSINESS, NOT LAW, contract with the government or person to fulfill a task which involves giving service or working with the person that they wish to refuse service or work to. They cannot drop the terms of contract, but by the same token ARE NOT REQUIRED to consent to the contracts terms in the first place. No one is held to a promise if they did not make it.
that is what is in the constitution in the united states of America, no citizen or country may change those parameters, regardless of belief or intention.
>>27417498
it's also a crime in burgerland, just in my opinion it shouldn't be
