Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Another Company Discriminates Against Gays

Options
1…2829313334…57

Comments

  • Options
    #902
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    robindch wrote: »
    As above, it's a fine line - I find looking at it from the other perspective helps - would you be comfortable printing stuff for Alive magazine or the Iona "Institute"?

    I haven't seen any evidence that the bakery refused to bake the cake because the customer was gay (which is, correctly, against the law), but plenty to suggest that it was because they didn't like what they were being asked to do (which is not against the law).

    Woah hang on.

    This is about a printer refusing civil partnership invitations. That is not a political message.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #903
    NZT73
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 51 ✭✭NZT73


    Why can't we respect people's choice's instead of always forcing them with a false morality.


  • Options
    #904
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    I take issue with this post .......... because I wish I had written it!!

    Extremely well written to say the least ...........

    well written fiction - yeah
    Any chance of a coherent reply from yourself as requested above by Akrasia??


  • Options
    #905
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    NZT73 wrote: »
    Why can't we respect people's choice's instead of always forcing them with a false morality.

    That's what the gays and others have been saying allright.


  • Options
    #906
    NZT73
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 51 ✭✭NZT73


    Nodin wrote: »
    That's what the gays and others have been saying allright.

    So we agree. Stop bothering them, people who don't want to deal with gays. There is plenty of space for both of us.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #907
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    NZT73 wrote: »
    So we agree. Stop bothering them, people who don't want to deal with gays. There is plenty of space for both of us.


    That would depend on the context they don't want to deal with them.


  • Options
    #908
    bjork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,554 ✭✭✭bjork


    NZT73 wrote: »
    So we agree. Stop bothering them, people who don't want to deal with gays. There is plenty of space for both of us.

    You must of misunderstood ;)

    He doesn't have the right to religious freedom. We have to force our beliefs down his throat until he submits.


    And then go to a sauna, where heterosexuals are excluded, to celebrate how liberal we are


    Afterwards we can stay in our "gay only" B&B


  • Options
    #909
    happy_knome
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 54 ✭✭happy_knome


    NZT73 wrote: »
    Why can't we respect people's choice's instead of always forcing them with a false morality.

    some people have an overwhelming urge to impose their own views upon others , fifty years ago those people joined the church , today they join the likes of the equality authority or some other busy body quango , todays secular nuns if you like

    they long to regulate thought , let alone speech

    true respect for free speech and individualism tollerates the close minded , the reactionary , the silly ( providing they are not engaging in violence or causing actual harm to someone else )


  • Options
    #910
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    Nodin wrote: »
    That would depend on the context they don't want to deal with them.
    I disagree. If a 16 year old black, gay girl asked the business to print birthday invitations to her super sweet 16, it is the business owner's right to refuse to perform this service. And it is the girl's right to name and shame the business and accuse them of racism, homophobia, inequality etc. in the hope that people will boycott it.


  • Options
    #911
    bjork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,554 ✭✭✭bjork


    K4t wrote: »
    I disagree. If a 16 year old black, gay girl asked the business to print birthday invitations to her super sweet 16, it is the business owner's right to refuse to perform this service. And it is the girl's right to name and shame the business and accuse them of racism, homophobia, inequality etc. in the hope that people will boycott it.

    What's stopping me of Naming and Shaming your business and accusing you of racism, inequality? Doesn't have to be true, just need to cry a bit on social media and the troops will gather.


    What's the point of the court?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #912
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,465 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    bjork wrote: »
    What's stopping me of Naming and Shaming your business and accusing you of racism, inequality? Doesn't have to be true, just need to cry a bit on social media and the troops will gather.


    What's the point of the court?

    Apparently the Court of public opinion is now how things are done.


  • Options
    #913
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    bjork wrote: »
    What's stopping me of Naming and Shaming your business and accusing you of racism, inequality? Doesn't have to be true, just need to cry a bit on social media and the troops will gather.
    Nothing. But you have to ask yourself, firstly, why would you do that? And secondly, why would 'the troops' believe your word over the business?
    What's the point of the court?

    To try criminals, not force private individuals to conform to common beliefs.


  • Options
    #914
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    K4t wrote: »
    I disagree. If a 16 year old black, gay girl asked the business to print birthday invitations to her super sweet 16, it is the business owner's right to refuse to perform this service. And it is the girl's right to name and shame the business and accuse them of racism, homophobia, inequality etc. in the hope that people will boycott it.

    My arse. If we took that approach the north would be the same as it was in 1922.


  • Options
    #915
    uck51js9zml2yt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,268 ✭✭✭✭uck51js9zml2yt


    gozunda wrote: »
    To the best recall of my biblical knowledge I don't believe Jesus Christ ever had a go at homosexuals tbh. I certainly don't consider it a basic principle of "Christianity". Its certainly in the OT where they suggest stoning homosexuals and others. My point was that few of the general public would be aware that the Printers were fundamental Christians even with that archaic reference to the OT.
    Jesus spoke about marriage. Paul in Romans dealt extensively with homosexuality and since he wrote the majority of what is now the new testament he's probably worth getting to know.
    Jesus also referred the judgement of Sodom and Gomorrah which was for homosexuality. Hence the word Sodomy.

    All these people trying convince us they know the Bible with their pontifications about what it says or doesn't say..:)


  • Options
    #916
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    Apparently the Court of public opinion is now how things are done.

    Ah so that's how murder, theft and all other civil and criminal offences are dealt with - by opinion Really?


  • Options
    #917
    B_Wayne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,039 ✭✭✭B_Wayne


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Woah hang on.

    This is about a printer refusing civil partnership invitations. That is not a political message.
    Yep, it's basically an event. By printing, they wouldn't be 'endorsing' anything. They'd simply be doing their job.
    NZT73 wrote: »
    Why can't we respect people's choice's instead of always forcing them with a false morality.

    Because being refused service has a genuine impact upon people. Also, where pray tell should it end? Should one be allowed to refuse Jewish people or single mothers? Conscience can pretty damn warped.


  • Options
    #918
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    NZT73 wrote: »
    So we agree. Stop bothering them, people who don't want to deal with gays.There is plenty of space for both of us.

    "People who don't want to deal with gays"? Seriously ...

    I'll pass in case I get an infraction.


  • Options
    #919
    bjork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,554 ✭✭✭bjork


    K4t wrote: »
    Nothing. But you have to ask yourself, firstly, why would you do that? And secondly, why would 'the troops' believe your word over the business?


    To try criminals, not force private individuals to conform to common beliefs.

    March 4 original post 4.06pm
    March 4 >5.58pm He thanks his friend for telling him how to make it public
    March 4 >10.00 pm on 4fm
    March 5 >11.20 am Company Responds


    The troops gather fairly quickly> they don't wait for the reponse


  • Options
    #920
    bjork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,554 ✭✭✭bjork


    https://scontent-ams.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfa1/v/l/t1.0-9/p180x540/1506926_1049383065077642_9095716851786195475_n.jpg?oh=6ba26f444bad8ff04b09753fcfa582fe&oe=55821F45

    Drogheda Community Resistance
    Drogheda Against Homophobia!

    Some intrepid individuals decided that Beulahprint was in need of some colour this evening.

    In case you don't know, the Drogheda company became national news when they refused to print invitations to a same sex civil ceremony, despite having taken one of the couples' business for the last four years (Check out the post below for more details).

    So tonight, to show that the residents of Drogheda do not support the company's homophobic stance, some smashing people hung the LGBT pride flag outside the premises.

    Maybe, somewhere over the rainbow, sun will shine to enlighten the Beulahprint owners; They could do with it, in the 21st century, bigotry and discrimination, be it on the basis of sexual preference, gender, race, class is not acceptable.

    Well done to all involved!

    From their FB^^^

    >Sexual preference and gender when it suits!!


  • Options
    #921
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Mack Jolly Storybook wrote: »
    Jesus spoke about marriage. Paul in Romans dealt extensively with homosexuality and since he wrote the majority of what is now the new testament he's probably worth getting to know. Jesus also referred the judgement of Sodom and Gomorrah which was for homosexuality. Hence the word Sodomy.

    I was referring to the teaching of Christ. As for your reply - That was >Paul< not Jesus. So where is anti gay sentiment stated as a basic principal of Christisity as claimed? As far as I remember Jesus was big into inclusivity even with people others considered 'sinners'. He also talked about a lot of things and sodomy can be practised by both hetro and homosexuals. So I hope the printers have a questionnaire to check their customers don't engage in such practises or have sex outside marriage or keep holy the sabbath day? I hope they are at least consistent.

    All these people trying convince us they know the Bible with their pontifications about what it says or doesn't say..:)

    Couldn't agree more ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #922
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    bjork wrote: »
    March 4 original post 4.06pm
    March 4 >5.58pm He thanks his friend for telling him how to make it public
    March 4 >10.00 pm on 4fm
    March 5 >11.20 am Company Responds


    The troops gather fairly quickly> they don't wait for the reponse
    That's the beauty of social media; of course it can be used for sinister purposes too, but mostly it is a good thing. I mean, cyber bullying exists and people complain about it a lot, but nobody ever seriously suggested that we should shut down social media to combat it! Well, they may have but they rightfully were not taken seriously.


  • Options
    #923
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    bjork wrote: »
    Well done to all involved!
    Great to see. And exactly how this situation should be handled, free from the courts.


  • Options
    #924
    B_Wayne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,039 ✭✭✭B_Wayne


    By this discussion's logic, these guys back in the sixties were awful for their discrimination against the white folk's belief.:rolleyes:
    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/friendship-9-civil-rights-activists-cleared-sit-in-article-1.2094936


  • Options
    #925
    bjork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,554 ✭✭✭bjork


    K4t wrote: »
    Great to see. And exactly how this situation should be handled, free from the courts.

    Putting flags outside their offices> What is the achievement there?


  • Options
    #926
    bb1234567
    Registered Users Posts: 5,501 ✭✭✭bb1234567


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    On this thread? No ........... I'm not going to go off topic.

    I will say this .......... I'm not homophobic but I will be voting No in the referendum ........... a printer can refuse to print certain material without discriminating against any one individual/group ......... ie. the printer would refuse to print said material for any individual/group regardless of that individual/group's race, religious beliefs, sexuality, culture etc.

    The thing is they were discriminating against them for being gay...they literally said it


  • Options
    #927
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    B_Wayne wrote: »
    By this discussion's logic, these guys back in the sixties were awful for their discrimination against the white folk's belief.:rolleyes:
    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/friendship-9-civil-rights-activists-cleared-sit-in-article-1.2094936
    It's actually your logic which is flawed as thankfully we don't have segregation laws or Jim Crow laws in this country. Or am I unaware of such laws against gay people in Ireland?


  • Options
    #928
    bjork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,554 ✭✭✭bjork


    GAA bans ref from wearing Rainbow Gay Pride wristband at Croker


    What nonsense^^


  • Options
    #929
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    bjork wrote: »
    Putting flags outside their offices> What is the achievement there?
    :confused: You were the one who posted the story and championed it, and I agreed that it was a great response. It draws attention to the story and shows that people will not stand idly by while these bizarre religious views still hold a place in our society.

    However, the business owners were still more than entitled to behave the way they did. Hopefully there will be a boycott of the business up until they change their views. Prosecuting them through the law is not the way to do this. They didn't even discriminate against anyone, they simply refused to print something which supported something they didn't support! Madness that you are on some sort of witch hunt to have them up in court.


  • Options
    #930
    bjork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,554 ✭✭✭bjork


    K4t wrote: »
    :confused:You were the one who posted the story and championed it, and I agreed that it was a great response. It draws attention to the story and shows that people will not stand idly by while these religious views still hold a place in our society.

    However, the business owners were still more than entitled to behave the way they did. Hopefully there will be a boycott of the business up until they change their views. Prosecuting them through the law is not the way to do this. They didn't even discriminate against anyone, they simply refused to print something which supported something they didn't support! Madness that you are on some sort of witch hunt to have them up in court.

    That wasn't my response, that was part of the post. They were patting themselves on the back


    This bit was my response

    From their FB^^^

    >Sexual preference and gender when it suits!!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #931
    happy_knome
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 54 ✭✭happy_knome


    B_Wayne wrote: »
    Yep, it's basically an event. By printing, they wouldn't be 'endorsing' anything. They'd simply be doing their job.


    Because being refused service has a genuine impact upon people. Also, where pray tell should it end? Should one be allowed to refuse Jewish people or single mothers? Conscience can pretty damn warped.

    why are single mothers presented as examples so often

    have they attained hero status amongst the left ?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement