Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 106 to 114 of 114

Progress on Australian Same Sex Marriage Bill

  1. #106
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    21,977


    Think about it. This guy runs a business and probably hires employees.

    Your wishes that he suffers makes others suffer. Over a lousy cake?
    Well, that argument is so absurd that it's hard to take it seriously enough to even answer it. And it smacks of desperation.

    Following your logic shown above, no business owner should ever be accountable for anything he does, because if his business suffers as a result, some innocent people working for him might lose their jobs or suffer a loss of income?

    What if (hypothetically) he was actually committing a crime? Should that be overlooked also, to preserve his employees' jobs?

    Of course that would be unfortunate, especially if the employees had no knowledge of his attitudes. Or even if they did; many of us have had bosses who were outright [fill in the epithet], but hey, the job was OK anyway and it provided a living. But that would be part of the "collateral damage," to use a favorite expression of the military. Life is hard sometimes.

    If their boss is being offensive enough to antagonize a substantial number of people and lose business as a result, they just might be hurt by it.

    BTW, I have no desire to see anyone "suffer." I do believe that actions have consequences. Since there is probably no way that the courts can satisfactorily solve this tangled mess, the marketplace results are probably the only outcome. And this will happen, inevitably, whether you think it's fair to the employees or not.

  2. #107
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Northwestern Ontario Canada
    Posts
    3,465
    Well, that argument is so absurd that it's hard to take it seriously enough to even answer it. And it smacks of desperation.
    Hardly. A poster is wishing the business ill and closing down. The business is defending themselves at the Supreme Court. So why not wait for the Supreme Court decision?

    Following your logic shown above, no business owner should ever be accountable for anything he does, because if his business suffers as a result, some innocent people working for him might lose their jobs or suffer a loss of income?
    Well no. Let's talk legal rights here. Yes if he is innocent and people will lose their jobs then it's a tragedy.

    What if (hypothetically) he was actually committing a crime? Should that be overlooked also, to preserve his employees' jobs?
    Nope. Once again. Let's talk legality and the law.

    Of course that would be unfortunate, especially if the employees had no knowledge of his attitudes. Or even if they did; many of us have had bosses who were outright [fill in the epithet], but hey, the job was OK anyway and it provided a living. But that would be part of the "collateral damage," to use a favorite expression of the military. Life is hard sometimes.
    You are going too far afield in your argument. You are assuming the baker is wrong in this case. That has yet to be determined and you are making purely theoretical arguments.

    If their boss is being offensive enough to antagonize a substantial number of people and lose business as a result, they just might be hurt by it.
    Of course. But is that the case here?

    BTW, I have no desire to see anyone "suffer." I do believe that actions have consequences. Since there is probably no way that the courts can satisfactorily solve this tangled mess, the marketplace results are probably the only outcome. And this will happen, inevitably, whether you think it's fair to the employees or not.
    But that's what one poster stated here. That they wish him ill and to suffer because of his stance. Maybe his employees agree with him and don't want to lose their jobs. That's allowed under the Constitution is it not?

  3. #108
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by Sunny View Post
    Well, that argument is so absurd that it's hard to take it seriously enough to even answer it. And it smacks of desperation.

    Following your logic shown above, no business owner should ever be accountable for anything he does, because if his business suffers as a result, some innocent people working for him might lose their jobs or suffer a loss of income?

    What if (hypothetically) he was actually committing a crime? Should that be overlooked also, to preserve his employees' jobs?

    Of course that would be unfortunate, especially if the employees had no knowledge of his attitudes. Or even if they did; many of us have had bosses who were outright [fill in the epithet], but hey, the job was OK anyway and it provided a living. But that would be part of the "collateral damage," to use a favorite expression of the military. Life is hard sometimes.

    If their boss is being offensive enough to antagonize a substantial number of people and lose business as a result, they just might be hurt by it.

    BTW, I have no desire to see anyone "suffer." I do believe that actions have consequences. Since there is probably no way that the courts can satisfactorily solve this tangled mess, the marketplace results are probably the only outcome. And this will happen, inevitably, whether you think it's fair to the employees or not.

    He covered all this with......

    "Over a lousy cake?"

  4. #109
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    21,977
    It's not over a "lousy cake," rgp, and you know it.

    Camper, as I've said, but you are choosing to ignore, the rules of the marketplace could go either way. If enough local people agree with the baker, this could boost his business. It could go either way.

  5. #110
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Northwestern Ontario Canada
    Posts
    3,465
    Quote Originally Posted by Sunny View Post
    It's not over a "lousy cake," rgp, and you know it.

    Camper, as I've said, but you are choosing to ignore, the rules of the marketplace could go either way. If enough local people agree with the baker, this could boost his business. It could go either way.
    He's willing to take the chance. He obviously knows the marketplace. I admire people who start and maintain their own businesses. It takes guts to meet all the challenges and the competition. Statistically the odds are in his favor.

  6. #111
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    6,837

  7. #112
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by Sunny View Post
    It's not over a "lousy cake," rgp, and you know it.

    Camper, as I've said, but you are choosing to ignore, the rules of the marketplace could go either way. If enough local people agree with the baker, this could boost his business. It could go either way.
    Ah but it is...they wanted a cake, & he said no....It's just that simple...now if one chooses to make more out of it, as it appears you do, then it becomes a whole new issue.

  8. #113
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Corte Bella, AZ
    Posts
    1,360
    Quote Originally Posted by Camper6 View Post
    Well I'm not against same sex marriages. It's none of my business. I am against forcing someone to have to bake a cake for the wedding under the Constitution which I am a fan of. Even though I am not a citizen of the U.S. I study the Constitution every chance I get because my family lives in the U.S.

    To be treated like everybody else? Well under the Constitution I don't have to treat anyone like everybody else.



    There are some that come here with a rational argument supported by the facts. Others come here to attack the poster for having their own opinion and then fake it with a Peace and Love signature.

    Businesses are within their rights to establish their own rules for admitting or banning people from their property.

    No shoes, no shirt, no service.
    lol - more "high pitched whine". You are still wrong on all accounts. Try running a small business here in the States, cause it ain't that simple. No shoes, no service?? Try putting a "Whites Only" sign in your shop window. Really.

    You keep trying to make this about me, but it isn't.

    Peace and love
    Hoot

  9. #114
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Northwestern Ontario Canada
    Posts
    3,465
    Quote Originally Posted by Hoot N Annie View Post
    lol - more "high pitched whine". You are still wrong on all accounts. Try running a small business here in the States, cause it ain't that simple. No shoes, no service?? Try putting a "Whites Only" sign in your shop window. Really.

    You keep trying to make this about me, but it isn't.

    Peace and love
    Hoot
    No you can't put whites only. Because the Supreme Court ruled on it. It's against the Constitution.

    Your constant wrong on all counts is your opinion but not based with facts and evidence.

    No shoes, no service does not violate the constitution. I can put that sign up. Businesses can set standards for their premises that don't violate the Constitution.


    I just copy over your posts and reply to them. You can't see where you are the one that is wrong.

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Please reply to this thread with any new information or opinions.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 30
    Last Post: 12-08-2017, 04:31 AM
  2. Holding up progress.
    By Falcon in forum General Discussions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-28-2017, 01:11 PM
  3. Ohio Bill for EMT/Firefighter pet care makes progress
    By applecruncher in forum General Discussions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-09-2015, 04:25 PM
  4. Idea in Progress, the Dream Lit Lamp
    By SeaBreeze in forum Home
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-21-2014, 09:23 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Family & Health Forums: Mom Forum - Health Forum - Low Carb Forum - Pet Forums