|
Post by hupthefool on Dec 10, 2014 15:52:26 GMT -5
So the interwebs are plastering out that we now have legal license to discriminate and EMT workers are released from providing care to the gays.
Or is it just the same version of the fed RFRA of 1993? Or of the other 22 states with one? Or wording similar to Arizona's that got vetoed?
Any thoughts?
|
|
TheGeneral
All-Andre Drummond
Perma-Newb
Dantonio > Harbaugh
Posts: 108
|
Post by TheGeneral on Dec 10, 2014 16:52:31 GMT -5
I'd be interested in hearing from an attorney on the legality of this, and if it's along the same line of right to refuse service that retailers and restaurants utilize
|
|
|
Post by joeking1978 on Dec 10, 2014 18:29:11 GMT -5
For me- I get it in some circumstances- the EMT/gay thing is just one level of the law that was passed that the media chose to jump on (as well as da gheys).
Having gay family members- I had my initial faux rage as well. When I read into it further- it's more about lawmakers finally having the courage to stand up to minority's groups who target business owners.
In example- if you are a black owned bakery and some one comes in wanting a cake with a KKK emblem on a burning cross- you, as a business owner- have the right to Refuse business. If you own a reception hall and want to decline business based on religious conflict- that is your right (albeit ignorant) to do so... Or on the contrary- if you are a gay owner of a print shop and Westboro baptist church is in town and wants signs made- you have the right to refuse that business.
Once upon a time, these laws were designed to thwart racism. However, racism as it was experienced in the 60's is fundamentally different than societies perception of it now. Also- in that time- a town might have only had one bakery, one store, one tailor. Now- if someone wants to deny your business- walk 10' and get it from his competitor (and maybe even for a better price). The need for this law has passed and power needs to be taken away from special interest groups are only working in their selfish best interest.
That all said- this bill should have been more thoroughly amended to eliminate discrimination in certain areas- Like healthcare, banking and education.
|
|
|
Post by mtdman on Dec 10, 2014 23:09:36 GMT -5
As a business owner, I don't get how these other businesses get into trouble for refusing to work for people. I have lots of people I won't work for, and I have ways to do that without saying "I don't want to work for you because of 'xyz'." Either ignore them until they go away and call someone else, give them an outrageous price that they don't want to pay, or just say "I'm booked up, sorry." Right now I'm not taking on any more snow clearing work, I don't have the space to add people. All you have to say is "Booked up." There are plenty of times when people call me for work and I get a certain feeling about them, that they are deadbeats, or screwing me around, etc. I just weed them out. And I don't tell them why, I just don't work for them.
If I was offended by someone or it went against my religious beliefs or whatever, I'd find a way to weed them out without telling them "I can't do it because you are gay." IMO sometimes people look for confrontation.
And the converse of that is the gays that want to force people to work for them. Why on earth would you want to hold your wedding in their hall if they don't like gays? Why pay them and force them to do something they don't want? Again, people looking for confrontation and to get things their way. I'd rather work with someone that wants my business.
And btw, I love working for the gays. They are usually pretty nice folks, pay on time, and treat you well. I get a lot of lesbian couples, love the lesbian couples. Their money spends just the same.
|
|
TheGeneral
All-Andre Drummond
Perma-Newb
Dantonio > Harbaugh
Posts: 108
|
Post by TheGeneral on Dec 10, 2014 23:16:33 GMT -5
MtdMan loves the rug-munchers
|
|