Mississippi Governor signs bill which allows LGBT discrimination

[ComplexCity]

You need to think harder

Please don't be like the rest of these people who do not like to read anything when someone disagrees with their post or point of view

The person with no shirt has to go home and put on a shirt. The person probably owns a shirt and wears them on a regular basis

Which doesn't negate that he's still being denied service and is not complying with the restaurant's (business) policy

The gay person has to learn to enjoy getting things put where they don't want things put or to enjoy putting things where they don't want to put them after a lifetime (probably, depends how you view sexual fluidity) of being gay

I have a different point of view which in this case is irrelevant because I'm not gay nor am I the people that identify as such

Alternatively, they have to learn to stop enjoying those things, depending on their gender, and keep their lifestyle a secret, which is like, super stress

Not debating this, however homosexuality is on the rise of being accepted so I slightly disagree with this

One seems drastically more unfair

I mean if it doesn't comply with the rules of the business, of course it would seem unfair. But I'm not trying to compare the two examples to one another. I'm simply point of the policy that businesses expect to be followed based off what they believe

Yes I'm bisexual and my sexual preference is irrelevant to the discussion we're having

For you to have negged me and disliked both of my post after I said I was indifferent about this topic, it seems I have struck a nerve

@Bold :|

Tf? Where? I've never heard of a man who's had a life style where they don't wear shirts out to public places.

Still not specific enough? I was referring to everyday life (billboards, on tv, at the beach, etc, etc). Logically, there is no one who was shirtless all their life, can't believe you even came to that conclusion

And never have I ever heard of people claiming discrimination because they were denied access to a public place like a restaurant for going in shirtless. Like your terrible example is not even remotely the same as being denied service for a person's sexual preference.

And when did I say you did? You and I don't know of it happening, doesn't mean it didn't/doesn't happen. But I won't play that game. You yourself even said what you would do so I don't see how you don't get it. My point was that I feel businesses (and yes, there are some businesses that have this at least where I live) have the right to remove an individual or not serve an individual based on what they believe and the rules they enforce

 

[LustyLover]

Damn SimpletonCity back at it again with the nonsensical comments. Please get banned permastyle.

 

[ComplexCity]

Damn SimpletonCity back at it again with the nonsensical comments. Please get banned permastyle.

If you feel that way...

 

[DominiqueX]

Freedom of religion /= Taking away rights of others. I don't really understand why people don't get this.

Exactly. Same with freedom of speech. Freedom ends when others are harmed by it.

 

[Uzumaki Macho]

Whist I have literally zero interest debating about this and I'm indifferent. Let me ask you something

If I went into a store shirtless that demanded me to have a shirt to be served and was denied service, do you think it's fair if I wasn't served?

You should change your username to SimpliCity. Let me ask you a question. Should a store owner who believes in segregation be able to not serve a member of a different race?

 

[ComplexCity]

You should change your username to SimpliCity. Let me ask you a question. Should a store owner who believes in segregation be able to not serve a member of a different race?

Because I don't agree with popular opinion? Nah, I like my name the way it is. To answer your question

Whist I have literally zero interest debating about this and I'm indifferent. Let me ask you something
QUOTE]

My point was that I feel businesses (and yes, there are some businesses that have this at least where I live) have the right to remove an individual or not serve an individual based on what they believe and the rules they enforce

 

[Adam Driver]

A. For you to have negged me and disliked both of my post after I said I was indifferent about this topic, it seems I have struck a nerve




B. Still not specific enough? I was referring to everyday life (billboards, on tv, at the beach, etc, etc). Logically, there is no one who was shirtless all their life, can't believe you even came to that conclusion



C. And when did I say you did? You and I don't know of it happening, doesn't mean it didn't/doesn't happen. But I won't play that game. You yourself even said what you would do so I don't see how you don't get it. My point was that I feel businesses (and yes, there are some businesses that have this at least where I live) have the right to remove an individual or not serve an individual based on what they believe and the rules they enforce

-A. I negged you because your logic is brain numbing and similiar manner of a troll.

-B. Everyday life? Like at home, the beach? Now you're listing places where it's ok to be shirtless :lol
We were using the example of a restaurant where logically wearing a shirt is appropriate.

-C. Wow @bold No business should have the right to deny service based on race, ***, religion, sexual preferences, seriously it's 2016 not 1900s. Wearing a shirt to a public place like a restaurant is common sense and simple courtesy that civilized people share with one another.

 

[ComplexCity]

-A. I negged you because your logic is brain numbing and similiar manner of a troll

Ok

-B. Everyday life? Like at home, the beach? Now you're listing places where it's ok to be shirtless :lol


We were using the example of a restaurant where logically wearing a shirt is appropriate

(I specified it for you)So if these places in public find it acceptable, why is it not acceptable in a restaurant?

-C. Wow @bold No business should have the right to deny service based on race, ***, religion, sexual preferences, seriously it's 2016 not 1900s. Wearing a shirt to a public place like a restaurant is common sense and simple courtesy that civilized people share with one another.

How can one tell a business whether they have a right to who they serve? Again, nobody on this website reads

Whist I have literally zero interest debating about this and I'm indifferent. Let me ask you something

 

[Adam Driver]

Ok



(I specified it for you)So if these places in public find it acceptable, why is it not acceptable in a restaurant?



How can one tell a business whether they have a right to who they serve? Again, nobody on this website reads

@redbold :| you really should consider changing your name to simplecity.
It's more than likely not accepted in a restaurant because in the civilized age we live in it's proper mannerism. It's the way we respectfully look in public places like a restaurant around other people. I can't believe you just asked me why it isn't ok to be shirtless in a restaurant like wow. Do you go to restaurants in your underwear? Lmao.


@bluebold
:|

It's a fcking paying customer. The business is there to run a business and make money not discriminate against others.


I thank you for identifying your bigotry in this thread so I know not to take you seriously in future threads/topics.

 

[Uzumaki Macho]

Because I don't agree with popular opinion? Nah, I like my name the way it is. To answer your question

Whist I have literally zero interest debating about this and I'm indifferent. Let me ask you something
QUOTE]

So racial sergregation should still be allowed in your opinion?

 

[Pumpkin Ninja]

ComplexCity, Uzumaki Macho does have a fair point. Belief in something isn't a strong enough reason to deny a person something.

It could very well be against a KKK restaurant owner's beliefs to serve black people, should he have the right to not serve them?

It creates a bad mentality. One might not agree with homosexuals, but if we're gonna be in a country that legalizes gay marriage, you might as well play nicely. You aren't selling your beliefs in doing so.

 

[ComplexCity]

@redbold :| you really should consider changing your name to simplecity.

Ok

It's more than likely not accepted in a restaurant because in the civilized age we live in it's proper mannerism

Speculation is speculation. Yet there are people who are not thrown out of restaurants for being ill mannered

It's the way we respectfully look in public places like a restaurant around other people. I can't believe you just asked me why it isn't ok to be shirtless in a restaurant like wow. Do you go to restaurants in your underwear? Lmao.

Yes because guys in their underwear is the same as them being shirtless :|

You're not telling me what harm it does to the restaurant, you're just stating what you feel should be acceptable and non-acceptable. It's not acceptable because the person who is shirtless does not comply with policies of the business. It has nothing to do with mannerisms

@bluebold
:|

It's a fcking paying customer. The business is there to run a business and make money not discriminate against others

I asked you a question and you went off because I wanted to hear your opinion. Did I use the wrong word or something? Do you know what indifferent means?

I thank you for identifying your bigotry in this thread so I know not to take you seriously in future threads/topics.

Yes I'm a bigot when the first thing I said was that I was indifferent.

 

[Pumpkin Ninja]

I do think that forcing people to do business with people they don't want to is a bit over the top though.

Does the law allow me to deny business with someone I don't like, and not based on their identity? (Serious question).

 

[ComplexCity]

ComplexCity, Uzumaki Macho does have a fair point. Belief in something isn't a strong enough reason to deny a person something.

It could very well be against a KKK restaurant owner's beliefs to serve black people, should he have the right to not serve them?

It creates a bad mentality. One might not agree with homosexuals, but if we're gonna be in a country that legalizes gay marriage, you might as well play nicely. You aren't selling your beliefs in doing so.

Whist I have literally zero interest debating about this and I'm indifferent.

Here's the thing I love about Narutobase.

When you make a statement people don't read your statement coherrently and generalize. Then when they don't see or agree on your point of view, they start to get emotional and it shows in their post. Instead of asking by what they meant by their post, people go on the assumption that they know what you're talking about


Before I go on with you, do you know what being indifferent means?

So racial sergregation should still be allowed in your opinion?

If you can quote me where I said that's what I fully beleive in then I'll agree

 

[Tyris]

It's terrible that this was actually passed on. The bill allows businesses to deny service to LGBT community depending on whether they discriminate against LGBT or if their religion/faith is against it and considers it a "sinful nature"

Examples:

-refuse marriage
-deny housing

Source:

You must be registered for see links

chicafila

 

[Pumpkin Ninja]

Here's the thing I love about Narutobase.

When you make a statement people don't read your statement and generalize. Then when they don't see or agree on your point of view, they start to get emotional and it shows in their post. Instead of asking by what they meant by their post, people go on the assumption that they know what you're talking about


Before I go on with you, do you know what being indifferent means?

I know what indifferent means. I was addressing the scenario you brought. There would be no reason to bring up the scenario if you were truly indifferent. The argument was clearly in defense of denying service regardless of what you say.

Regardless, I messaged you not for your beliefs, but rather questioning how your analogy about no shirts, no service, holds.

 

[ComplexCity]

I know what indifferent means. I was addressing the scenario you brought. There would be no reason to state if you were truly indifferent. The argument was clearly in defense of denying service regardless of what you say.

And the cycle continues


I asked the question because I was curious about the answer. I wasn't defending anything. Since when does asking a question and probing an answer = believing what you asked? Mind you, he edited his post with the two bullets after I commented

 

[Adam Driver]

Ok




Speculation is speculation. Yet there are people who are not thrown out of restaurants for being ill mannered




Yes because guys in their underwear is the same as them being shirtless :|

You're not telling me what harm it does to the restaurant, you're just stating what you feel should be acceptable and non-acceptable. It's not acceptable because the person who is shirtless does not comply with policies of the business. It has nothing to do with mannerisms




I asked you a question and you went off because I wanted to hear your opinion. Did I use the wrong word or something? Do you know what indifferent means?



Yes I'm a bigot when the first thing I said was that I was indifferent.

@bold I'm done with your no shirt bs. Your logic is shared with that of a bigot.

If you don't care why the hell are you even posting in this thread starting an argument? Clearly I wasn't off about you being a troll. I'm not going to reply to anything else you have to say, I have a clear understanding of thought process you have, and it's not one I want to waste any more time discussing with.

 

[Pumpkin Ninja]

And the cycle continues


I asked the question because I was curious about the answer. I wasn't defending anything. Since when does asking a question and probing an answer = believing what you asked?

I'm sorry if everyone other than you thought that was anything more than a question. Besides, my point is the no-shirt, no service analogy isn't really valid.

 

[ComplexCity]

I'm sorry if everyone other than you thought that was anything more than a question. Besides, my point is the no-shirt, no service analogy isn't really valid.

I'll wait for your PM if you're still sending it, if not I'll just post in here