People should vote for him as a huge fuck you to the democratic process.

It's precisely why Labour in the UK and Bernie are getting hammered in the polls. Patience is running thin with the neo-leftie racist, sexism and SJW politics. Trump is a defence mechanism for these fucks, whether you agree with him or not.

So you put the tangible, short-term "good" of your society over doing the objectively morally correct thing.

What the fuck does this mean?

I swear, you fucking progressives and nu-males would tear down the entire institution if it meant that society would become a modicum more """equal""".

http://metro.co.uk/2016/03/23/national-union-of-students-tells-lgbt-societies-to-drop-gay-mens-reps-because-they-dont-face-oppression-in-the-community-5771100/
Can we purge these identitarian cumnuggets out of education already

Although saying that the NUS has been a cancer in academia since the 70s so I can't say this surprises me too much.

fucking subhuman weebs have to ruin every thread smh

TAKE THE PEE PEE TO THE LOO

Lends itself to requiring an active LGBT friendly community, which can't always be the case.
You're not going to get enough boycotters in a small town at the only deli there.

First of all, why would you live in such a bumfuck desolate community that can barely scrape together a couple of convenience stores in the first place? Even the isolated pockets of towns and villages that I know of in the UK have several stores and a supermarket. If you're that desperate, pop in to a fucking Wal-Mart and get a cake done. Pretty sure they're happy to take your money regardless of who you're fucking.

Except if they live in a small community and there's only a handful of places to get the service from.

Again, this isn't the Wild West any more. And even if this somehow does happen, it's pretty much the most isolated of isolated incidences and is not indicative of how the majority of businesses operate.

Quote from: Meta Cognition on April 02, 2016, 03:43:19 PM

Quote from: Mad Max on April 02, 2016, 03:40:17 PM

I refuse to believe you're so retarded that you think providing your business's service at a wedding you don't agree with means your religious beliefs are somehow violated.

Good, because I've never said that.

Other people feel that way. That's my point. I'm not even religious. And, let's be honest, if they do believe that gay marriage is a sin. . . Then asking them to partake in what they believe to literally be a sinful ceremony is not going to sit well with them.

This really isn't difficult. I don't know why you can't just put your hands up and saying "Yes, I'm disregarding the beliefs of the religious, but I believe its worth it." Instead you're just pussyfooting around with mental gymnastics that would make even Camnator blush.

Why do we have to allow someone to run a business in such an arbitrarily discriminatory fashion just because they it's according to their backwards moral code? If a business can't conduct itself to operate with equity, why do they deserve to have that business?

So your response is to legally penalize them? Yeah I'm sure that totally won't embed their beliefs even further.

RELIGION

OF

PEAS

>Regressive left

-chuckle.gif-

maymay

Quote from: Mordo on April 01, 2016, 04:08:00 PM

Quote from: SecondClass on April 01, 2016, 04:03:50 PM

Quote from: Mordo on April 01, 2016, 04:02:34 PM

Quote from: SecondClass on April 01, 2016, 03:54:27 PM

Quote from: Mordo on April 01, 2016, 03:51:22 PM

Quote from: SecondClass on April 01, 2016, 03:37:36 PM

And it's bad when that happens, too. Discrimination is discrimination. Not sure what you're trying to prove here.

That morally sanctimonious fuckwits always seem to turn out to be hypocrites?

Let's cut the shit here. That whole bakery fiasco was a complete one sided attack on Christian inspired businesses. Not one word was mentioned of any Islamic bakeries that behaved similarly towards LGBT customers.

I could give you a run down of how the free market responds to decisions like these and how this really isn't a problem at all, as I have done innumerable times in this forum, but I feel like it would fall on deaf ears.

Go write an article criticizing Huffpost or some shit, I couldn't care less about the reason why you're being discriminatory. The point is that discrimination is happening. Christian, Jewish, Muslim, atheist, it doesn't matter in the least. This is about rights under the law, not religion.

Denying someone a service because it engages with a specific activity that they are not comfortable with is not discrimination, and it never will be, no matter how much you crybabies scream about it.

If someone approached me to hypothetically design a hardcore BDSM themed product I'm well within my rights to tell them to fuck off, as would most of you I would wager. LGBT rights and business autonomy are not interchangeable, surprisingly enough.

You're denying someone a service because of the way they were born. You're not born a BDSM enthusiast, so your little metaphor doesn't hold up.

Denying someone a service because of their sexual orientation is already illegal. That's not what anyone is positing in this thread.

Yes, it is. If a straight person has a right to marriage, then a gay person does as well. If a straight person can walk into a store and buy a wedding cake, then a gay person can walk into the same store and buy the same wedding cake. If you disagree with that, you're advocating a refusal of services based on sexuality.

Remind me of that law again which denies a gay person the right to a wedding cake?

Oh wait there is none.

That's because America was founded on the principles of a free market. There are myriad organizations that specifically cater to gay weddings that no one has bothered to mention in this thread. Just because a select few Christian bakeries that don't feel comfortable performing that type of business transaction is not indicative of some kind of mystical, oppressive force against homosexual people.

Quote from: Mordo on April 01, 2016, 03:51:22 PM

Quote from: SecondClass on April 01, 2016, 03:37:36 PM

And it's bad when that happens, too. Discrimination is discrimination. Not sure what you're trying to prove here.

That morally sanctimonious fuckwits always seem to turn out to be hypocrites?

Let's cut the shit here. That whole bakery fiasco was a complete one sided attack on Christian inspired businesses. Not one word was mentioned of any Islamic bakeries that behaved similarly towards LGBT customers.

I could give you a run down of how the free market responds to decisions like these and how this really isn't a problem at all, as I have done innumerable times in this forum, but I feel like it would fall on deaf ears.

Go write an article criticizing Huffpost or some shit, I couldn't care less about the reason why you're being discriminatory. The point is that discrimination is happening. Christian, Jewish, Muslim, atheist, it doesn't matter in the least. This is about rights under the law, not religion.

Denying someone a service because it engages with a specific activity that they are not comfortable with is not discrimination, and it never will be, no matter how much you crybabies scream about it.

If someone approached me to hypothetically design a hardcore BDSM themed product I'm well within my rights to tell them to fuck off, as would most of you I would wager. LGBT rights and business autonomy are not interchangeable, surprisingly enough.

And it's bad when that happens, too. Discrimination is discrimination. Not sure what you're trying to prove here.

That morally sanctimonious fuckwits always seem to turn out to be hypocrites?

Let's cut the shit here. That whole bakery fiasco was a complete one sided attack on Christian inspired businesses. Not one word was mentioned of any Islamic bakeries that behaved similarly towards LGBT customers.

I could give you a run down of how the free market responds to decisions like these and how this really isn't a problem at all, as I have done innumerable times in this forum, but I feel like it would fall on deaf ears.

Quote from: Mordo on April 01, 2016, 09:24:55 AM

Quote from: Mehtta on April 01, 2016, 01:20:13 AM

"The worker who becomes a policeman in the service of the capitalist state, is a bourgeois cop, not a worker."

Cops act above others because they don't identify themselves as being a part of the people. They see the people as something to be disciplined and restrained.

Except that's literally their job.

Cop's aren't there to be your best buddy. They're a regulated body of persons empowered by the state to enforce the law, protect property, and limit civil disorder.

If you want to talk about excessive use of police force, that's fine, but let's not pretend like the role of a police officer is somehow broken and unnecessary because it really isn't.

So long as our current economic conditions are still present, the role of the police officer will be broken. In the most basic sense, the role of a police officer is a sensible and reasonable one, but this is not the basic sense.

Elaborate.

"The worker who becomes a policeman in the service of the capitalist state, is a bourgeois cop, not a worker."

Cops act above others because they don't identify themselves as being a part of the people. They see the people as something to be disciplined and restrained.

Except that's literally their job.

Cop's aren't there to be your best buddy. They're a regulated body of persons empowered by the state to enforce the law, protect property, and limit civil disorder.

If you want to talk about excessive use of police force, that's fine, but let's not pretend like the role of a police officer is somehow broken and unnecessary because it really isn't.