Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 17   Go Down

Author Topic: Religious Freedom Act  (Read 140736 times)

markadams99

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 191
    • http://thelightcavalry.zenfolio.com
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #180 on: April 02, 2015, 12:35:44 pm »

Wildlight and markadams99... I would like to kick the camel's nose back out of the tent, and keep the legal principle of non-discrimination in public accommodations (including businesses) intact.
Diego and Nancy, so, just to be clear, when I ask you to be photographer for my next KKK "ban the bum" rally, you'll be there to serve?
« Last Edit: April 02, 2015, 12:38:48 pm by markadams99 »
Logged

AlterEgo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1995
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #181 on: April 02, 2015, 12:39:37 pm »

keep the legal principle of non-discrimination in public accommodations (including businesses) intact.
the argument is whether some business is indeed a public accommodation
Logged

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4755
    • My photography site
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #182 on: April 02, 2015, 12:45:22 pm »

It isn't discrimination for a Jew to turn down a neo Nazi wedding, we can all freely decide what assignments we wish to take. It would be discrimination to decline the job by telling the potential customer you wouldn't do it solely because the weding is for neo Nazi's. Or to take a deposit, show up at the wedding, see that it's a neo Nazi wedding and refuse to do the work. There's a big difference between refusing to do the work, without discrimination and refusing the work and making the discrimination obvious. If a black couple go to restaurant and are refused service because they are black and told so, this is clear discrimination. If the restaurant owner closes early and tells the couple the chef was ill, even if that's untrue, it's not discrimination.

So making the discrimination obvious makes a difference? That is twisted, isn't it? The only difference is whether the discriminatory act can be proved!

Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #183 on: April 02, 2015, 12:57:58 pm »

yes, you lied then but you disclosed your true intent to discriminate for the record now... so by the same logic it is ok for a white photog to do the same to negro wedding or anti-gay photog to a gay wedding.... it is very clear that you like to discriminate when it suits you and cry wolf when it doesn't ...
Yes I lied, but I didn't discriminate, far lesser of two evils. And a very smart business mode too.

The fact you apply what I wrote hypothetically makes you certain that I like to discriminate illustrates to anyone paying attention that your argument is (like the one about DNG) completely ridiculous
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #184 on: April 02, 2015, 01:01:59 pm »

So making the discrimination obvious makes a difference?
Yes it does! But you failed to read or understand the definition of the term, you failed to understand it is the person at the receiving end of the discrimination that is key.

I can think but not say I think you're a stinkin Brit. My internal opinion is my own. If I say publicly you are stinkin Brit, and I refuse to shoot your wedding, you've been discriminated. 
And for poor AlterEgo, I don't think that John, this is a totally hypothetical example!
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

AlterEgo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1995
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #185 on: April 02, 2015, 01:06:08 pm »

So making the discrimination obvious makes a difference? That is twisted, isn't it? The only difference is whether the discriminatory act can be proved!

that LGBT crowd is like that, no wonder... all about smart lies
Logged

AlterEgo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1995
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #186 on: April 02, 2015, 01:07:19 pm »

Yes I lied, but I didn't discriminate, far lesser of two evils. And a very smart business mode too.

The fact you apply what I wrote hypothetically makes you certain that I like to discriminate illustrates to anyone paying attention that your argument is (like the one about DNG) completely ridiculous

the fact you totally approve the discrimination and call to hide it behind lies... face it !
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #187 on: April 02, 2015, 01:08:31 pm »

Oh, this is getting really funny. So, forcing people to lie is the answer? Let's say lying does become the preferred method for avoiding jobs you do not want to do. I doubt that would appease social terrorists. The next thing you know, they would subpoena photographer's calendar and schedule to prove he was lying he would be busy on that day. Or they'd call 911 to obtain a proof that "the chef is ill."

AlterEgo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1995
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #188 on: April 02, 2015, 01:08:53 pm »

But you failed to read or understand the definition of the term, you failed to understand it is the person at the receiving end of the discrimination that is key.

when that person is LGBT it is bad, when that person is neo Nazi it is good, we got that  ;D


Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #189 on: April 02, 2015, 01:14:32 pm »

the fact you totally approve the discrimination and call to hide it behind lies... face it !
Well that's totally untrue and unjustified but it is typical of your posting and mindset.
Are you telling us you have no bias that would keep you from accepting a job without obvious discrimination?
Again, it appears you and John have vastly different ideas of what discrimination means. In my example, I refused to accept the job of the Nazi's without a lick of discrimination as far as they know. Discrimination has to be directed and recognized by the people being discriminated against. I don't have to believe or disbelieve in the Nazi's agenda to accept or not accept their job offer, and I don't have to discriminate to get out of doing the work!
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4755
    • My photography site
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #190 on: April 02, 2015, 01:15:02 pm »

And for poor AlterEgo, I don't think that John, this is a totally hypothetical example!

Do you mean AlterEgo or deeejaaa or vladimirovich?
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #191 on: April 02, 2015, 01:17:25 pm »

Oh, this is getting really funny. So, forcing people to lie is the answer?
The answer is to be accepting of everyone. I'd be hard pressed to do that with Nazi's or ISIS terrorists to name a few. And further, I don't have to discriminate, I can refuse with or without an excuse without the other party being discriminated, a point a few here seem to misunderstand. 
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #192 on: April 02, 2015, 01:18:56 pm »

Do you mean AlterEgo or deeejaaa or vladimirovich?
You pick.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #193 on: April 02, 2015, 01:20:46 pm »

Alert the media!!! And the federal and state legislatures... no law is necessary. Revoke them all. All reduce them to one line, one word: lie!. Tell people to lie. Problem solved.

AlterEgo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1995
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #194 on: April 02, 2015, 01:27:28 pm »

Discrimination has to be directed and recognized by the people being discriminated against.
not true - discrimination against people with diminished mental capacity (who naturally can't recognize that they are being discriminated) for example  ;D ... your logic is as usual quite wrong... discrimination is discrimination when the laws & courts say it is and in USA it is enough for DOJ to collect a meaningful statistics for example to start the case, lie or not in the face of discriminated (jew or neo nazi)...
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #195 on: April 02, 2015, 01:28:54 pm »

Alert the media!!! And the federal and state legislatures... no law is necessary. Revoke them all. All reduce them to one line, one word: lie!. Tell people to lie. Problem solved.
Lying and dissemination are not the same! Not even close. If you wish to go on record here, telling us you never lie or have never lied, do so.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #196 on: April 02, 2015, 01:31:07 pm »

not true - discrimination against people with diminished mental capacity (who naturally can't recognize that they are being discriminated) for example  ;D ... your logic is as usual quite wrong... discrimination is discrimination when the laws & courts say it is and in USA it is enough for DOJ to collect a meaningful statistics for example to start the case, lie or not in the face of discriminated (jew or neo nazi)...
PROVE legally or otherwise that I discriminated with my lie about Passover dinner to get out of shooting the Nazi wedding.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

AlterEgo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1995
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #197 on: April 02, 2015, 01:32:14 pm »

PROVE legally or otherwise that I discriminated with my lie about Passover dinner to get out of shooting the Nazi wedding.

so now you finally understand that you were wrong about "recognized by the people being discriminated against"  :D ... never too late to learn, as for the prove legally - yes, certainly you need to be convicted in the court of law (or as LGBT crowd wants it - in the court of their (only) public opinion) - but that point about "recognized by the people being discriminated against" will not stand a chance there (in a court of law, I mean) :D
« Last Edit: April 02, 2015, 01:35:36 pm by AlterEgo »
Logged

NancyP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2513
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #198 on: April 02, 2015, 01:42:23 pm »

Markadams99: Nope. I am a mere amateur, and have never shot any event beyond the local photo club meeting and have never done any PJ.  But if a KKK member shows up at my hospital, I will participate in his medical care, as for any other patient.

I never thought of this forum as particularly religious. There's a lot more "eeewwww" than theology in this thread, in my opinion. I base that opinion on the complete lack of response to the 'pharmacist refusal to fill birth control pill prescription" issue I mentioned earlier.

Logged

markadams99

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 191
    • http://thelightcavalry.zenfolio.com
Re: Religious Freedom Act
« Reply #199 on: April 02, 2015, 01:50:17 pm »

Markadams99: Nope. I am a mere amateur, and have never shot any event beyond the local photo club meeting and have never done any PJ.  But if a KKK member shows up at my hospital, I will participate in his medical care, as for any other patient.

I never thought of this forum as particularly religious. There's a lot more "eeewwww" than theology in this thread, in my opinion. I base that opinion on the complete lack of response to the 'pharmacist refusal to fill birth control pill prescription" issue I mentioned earlier.

I want to be sure I understand your position. Suppose you were a professional photographer. Would you accept my commission for my next KKK "ban the bum" rally?

Diego, since you were so insistent that Slobodan directly answered your question, I address this to you as well.
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 17   Go Up