I don’t think it’s right, that those lesbians won!! What they’re doing is EVIL!!
Rob’s Wife said:
They took a deposit. They did not take the full amount. Further, they did not know what exactly the event was going to be. It appears that it is possible they were mislead.
Taking a deposit may have been enough, especially if it was a high amount. Many places don’t take the full amount until after the event, but half can still be a good amount of money. I must say that if they didn’t know what the circumstances of the event were - then they were rather foolish in their portion of the agreement. Standard rules are to always know what you’re agreeing to when exchanging money.
The argument that you make is not what the plaintiffs were arguing. They were arguing discrimination. This is further evidenced by their subsequent unhappiness with part of the decision.
Yes they were, but the court didn’t agree with them either. It even said KoC cannot be forced to go against their beliefs. As for finding another location, I don’t think (and I’m aware my thinking may not be reflected in other courts) the courts meant that KoC was required to do so, rather since they were canceling on a duo (I can’t bring myself to say “couple”) that had already sent out invitations - it would have mitigated the damage if they’d helped them find other accomodations.
Entering private institutions for the express intent to “de-homophobe” them is an increasing tactic in the militant homosexual community. I’m don’t know if that is the case here but it certainly could be.
I agree, but as I don’t know in this case and they didn’t win that ground in this round - I’m willing to agree with the court.
But this ruling was against the discrimination suit.
Rob’s Wife said:
I think the era of banning blacks from businesses simply because the owner disliked blacks is long over. Business owners can not refuse to serve members of the public that they consider distasteful.
If you consider the influence of lobbyists and of campaign contributions, I think you will find that private enterprise may have too much influence over government.
Acutally certain types of business (restaurant, bar, airlines) can say no and not serve/service you.
Yeah and in my humble opinion there are TOO many “protected” classes!
Have you ever seen the sign: “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.” You cannot FORCE someone to run a business your way. If I don’t want to allow known habitual shoplifters (criminals) into my store, I will not be forced to allow them. I will also not allow – if i were a Priest – homosexual “married” couples (criminals against the holy law of God) into my parish hall to celebrate this crime.
Also your analogy is flawed. It is immoral to disregard people because of their race. There is lawful and just discrimination. Discrimination is NOT a bad word, not matter how much society tries to calm it is.
Where you see the above mentioned sign, neither party has entered into a business agreement. A business can’t enter into a contract and back out after signing on the dotted line. The K of C should have been more careful in their contracts or written in an escape clause. Without such contingencies, they entered into a legally binding agreement. Only a fool would think you could back out without any risk of liability.
No, they aren’t because the KoC said no and the court backed up their right to do so.
I would think this entire episode would be negated if such acts, same sex marriage, were illegal to begin with.
Rob’s Wife said: