Should businesses be allowed to deny fat/ugly people?

This Indiana bill is getting a lot of attention, but is it really that different from discrimination at other businesses? Clubs often deny fat/ugly/unfashionable people. When you think about it there's really a lot of discrimination and it's just not by race/religion/sex/sexual orientation. People just love to discriminate.

 

You're missing the point.

The Bible doesn't mention race, color, religion, physical beauty or gender, it does however specifically mention homosexuality.

Romans 1:26-28 - 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. 28 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.

Because our Constitutionally protected belief make some folks feel icky, well that's just too bad.

 

Let me make this simple for you. Take a list of everyone currently alive on the planet. Now create a set for each permutation of that list: every single combination. One of those sets will include all black people and nobody else, one set will include all homosexuals and nobody else, trillions and trillions will include random combinations of people, ~6 billion of them will include just one person. You get the idea.

Now create a list of all possible reasons for refusing service. You don't like green ties, you dislike homosexuals, you left your keys at home - every single reason. Even the illogical ones.

Finally, mix the lists and find every possible permutation of the reasons for refusing service to any collection of individuals.

[hr][/hr]

Each of those reasons for refusing service to whatever combination of individuals should be permissible. I don't think I can get much clearer than that.

 

Why is it that we feel the need to dance around the reality I hope everyone already knows.

The issue here is obviously religious and offensive to those who are not. I am not gay, but am also not religious. I do not like the idea of people who are religious trying to spew their opinions on society.through law.

Freedom OF religion should include freedom FROM religion.

 

Hey, if you don't give a crap about making money, sure, discriminate, that's a healthy business plan.

I'm sure that refusing business based on beliefs won't backfire at all. After all, that's (whatever reason you choose to discriminate) dollars, and aren't as good as normal dollars.

 

But your quoted section does not speak to a duty or right or entitlement to discriminate, nor mention any other recommended course of conduct. How do you get from the premise that an act is defined as a sin or an abomination, to any specific religiously sponsored or endorsed public or private response to that sin and that this discrimination remedy must be the biblical recommended or required response. It is the right to respond by discriminating that you claim as religiously based. That is what would make the discrimination part of the free exercise of your faith. You need to quote the section that says Christians must not bake cakes, or make floral arrangements for such sinners to have any right protected to refuse to do so.

Can't find it? Well that's just too bad.

 

On the other hand, the country was founded by people fleeing religious persecution. They sought freedom to practice their religion - or nonreligion - without government interference. So they formulated a government that was restricted from regulating people's religious beliefs. The idea that government can force private businesses to discard their moral convictions violates that principle.

 

Oh...that's right, Corporations are people now. Just a matter of time before Churches transform into people as well, they already seem to have more rights than many.

 

Pretty sure that's euphemism for "you are not rich enough".

 

External, non-private factors should not be used as a basis for discrimination - e.g., race, age, gender, looks, weight, handicap... But behaviors should be fair game because they're identities that people choose whether or not to reveal - e.g., vulgarity, open sexuality, being a Patriots fan... These are not things a business owner would know about a customer unless said customer is voluntarily vulgar, public about his or her sexual preferences/practices, or acts like a typical obnoxious Patriots fan. A business owner reserves the right not to serve people who don't want to keep their private affairs private.

 

That already happens. I have zero problem with the Indiana bill. Those that want to boycott the state ought to boycott the country since that mean, hateful, bigoted Bill Clinton signed the same bill on a federal level.

But why let facts get in the way of faux outrage and promoting the leftist agenda at all costs?

 

I don't follow. Churches and corporations alike have discriminated by class, among other criteria, since the nation's beginning. In both cases, it's the people inside that do the discriminating.

 

Did you seriously just say the Bible doesn't mention race, color, or religion?

Edit: The Bible doesn't mention gender?!?

 

Those colonists fleeing religious persecution only wanted their own religion to be the one persecuting.

 

Yeah.... 20 states, including your own, are just full of businesses that have failed because of this law.


No one is refusing gays because of this law. Shocking, I know.
If they were, we would be seeing the outraged (people like you) linking to the numerous stories.

 

Neither does the Bible say you should refuse service to murderers and thieves. But most Christians would probably consider that a characteristic of their faith.

 

When referencing sin, as he was saying.... no, it doesn't.

 

Does a restaurant owner have a basis for throwing out a group of racists that that is open about their racism and the superiority of their own race?

 

Seriously? What was the Curse of Ham again?

What does the Bible say about believing in other gods?

 

A business should be able to deny anyone for any reason.

The only entity in which you should expect fair treatment from is the government.

 

The Bible also says women can not enter your home when they are menstruating. How do you propose devout Christian business owners address that one? "I need a female assist on table 4 - tampon check."

 

I don't have a problem letting businesses discriminate, but they should be required to clearly advertise their discriminatory policies.

 

You see this is something about the homosexual lobby I don't understand. Why do they believe they have the right to force everyone else to accept their definition of morality but no one else has a right to their own version there of? I think every business should have the right to do business or not do business with anyone on any ground they choose. If they wish to turn down the money rather than do business with someone then it's their decision and it might well cause irreparable harm to their business.

Two stories here from back in the day. Local drugstore had a segregated counter, African Americans decided they'd had enough of that state of affairs and announced they wouldn't shop their until the practice ended. It ended about a month later when the owner of the drugstore realized that African Americans in that small town made up about fifty percent of his revenue stream and in fact he couldn't stay in business without them. And of course there was the Montgomery bus boycott.

 

And now there are a bunch of groups boycotting Indiana.

And the Montgomery bus boycotters faced violent backlash for their actions. It was a Supreme Court ruling that desegregated the buses, not a loss of revenue.

 

People telling lies about a law are sometimes effective.