Refusing Service on Religious Grounds

  • Thread starter Thread starter Daizies
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fairwinds said:
you’d personally do this, even if it wasn’t company policy (which it isn’t)?

F/
Click to expand...
We are talking about the owners of a company implementing a policy. The situation you present wouldn’t apply.
 
CatholicGeek1 said:
We are talking about the owners of a company implementing a policy. The situation you present wouldn’t apply.
Click to expand...
that’s right, I’m asking a tougher question. and your answer is?

as a company owner, I’d either obey the law or get out of the business. I’d never instruct my employees to interrogate guests.

F/
 
Fairwinds said:
that’s right, I’m asking a tougher question. and your answer is?

as a company owner, I’d either obey the law or get out of the business. I’d never instruct my employees to interrogate guests.

F/
Click to expand...
As a Catholic do you regularly offer sacrifice or acts of penance for them?
 
TheWarriorMonk said:
You might want to familiarize yourself with what some of these children go through. My sources are my ex-wife who was a therapist that dealt with such children, my ex mother-in-law who had foster children coming in and out of her house for over a decade, and my first cousin who has her Master’s in Social Work that has dealt with such children for about three decades. There is a lot of physical, verbal, and sexual abuse of these children, in particular minority and disabled children.
Click to expand...
Exceptions happen; they don’t make the rule.
 
Edward_H said:
As a Catholic would you offer sacrifice or acts of penance for them?
Click to expand...
for the guests?

I’d never interrogate guests and don’t accept the premise of “gaydar”, so if my conscience were formed such that I could run an inn and comply with the civil law, knowing that some guests were gay, I might offer sacrifice of acts of penance, if directed by my spiritual advisor.

if my conscience were such that I could never provide lodging to gay or unmarried couples, I wouldn’t be in the business, so there would be no reason to offer sacrifice of acts of penance.

I’m a criminal defense attorney and can turn down anyone. but I don’t, with only one very narrow exception. it might be hair splitting, but I can make sure the government doesn’t run over the rights of even monsters without aiding them in their crimes. so it might be the same with gays/unmarrieds. they need shelter, I provide shelter.

F/
 
Fairwinds said:
for the guests?

I’d never interrogate guests and don’t accept the premise of “gaydar”, so if my conscience were formed such that I could run an inn and comply with the civil law, knowing that some guests were gay, I might offer sacrifice of acts of penance, if directed by my spiritual advisor.

if my conscience were such that I could never provide lodging to gay or unmarried couples, I wouldn’t be in the business, so there would be no reason to offer sacrifice of acts of penance.

I’m a criminal defense attorney and can turn down anyone. but I don’t, with only one very narrow exception. it might be hair splitting, but I can make sure the government doesn’t run over the rights of even monsters without aiding them in their crimes. so it might be the same with gays/unmarrieds. they need shelter, I provide shelter.

F/
Click to expand...
Right…if you suspect sin, you could and should make an act of penance out of love of God and love of them.
 
Fairwinds said:
I don’t notice those things. a person’s sexual preferences are off my personal radar, they’re just not important.

regardless, a 20% error rate in discriminating against a class of people is **outrageously **unacceptable.
Click to expand...
Hardly, if you’re honest you’ll admit that you make 25 such decisions a day about people’s moods with less data.
 
Edward_H said:
Hardly, if you’re honest you’ll admit that you make 25 such decisions a day about people’s moods with less data.
Click to expand...
I’m paid to do that, I’ve had years of practice in deciding who is lying. but whether or not a person is gay has no significance in my daily life, so my “gaydar” skills will yield a greater than the unacceptable 20% error rate of gaydar adepts.
 
Fairwinds said:
I’m paid to do that, I’ve had years of practice in deciding who is lying. but whether or not a person is gay has no significance in my daily life, so my “gaydar” skills will yield a greater than the unacceptable 20% error rate of gaydar adepts.
Click to expand...
What you’re judgmental too? You decide who is lying? Oh my.
 
Fairwinds said:
I don’t notice those things. a person’s sexual preferences are off my personal radar, they’re just not important.

regardless, a 20% error rate in discriminating against a class of people is **outrageously **unacceptable.
Click to expand...
Are saying you are not obsessed with homosexuals and whether or not they are actively having sex? What is wrong with you?? 😃

it’s getting deep in this thread…😛
 
Julianna said:
Are saying you are not obsessed with homosexuals and whether or not they are actively having sex? What is wrong with you?? 😃

it’s getting deep in this thread…😛
Click to expand...
not me personally. but I receive dossiers on everyone suspected of not being married. for the Permanent Record.
 
Edward_H said:
What you’re judgmental too? You decide who is lying? Oh my.
Click to expand...
that’s what I’m paid for. actually, I assume that everyone’s lying. clients, the other parties, the opposing counsel, my staff.
 
Fairwinds said:
that’s right, I’m asking a tougher question. and your answer is?

as a company owner, I’d either obey the law or get out of the business. I’d never instruct my employees to interrogate guests.

F/
Click to expand...
And I never said to do so. I said to make it a policy and post a sign or some such. If someone was obviously violating the policy, then kick them out.

My point was that you have to be consistent. If you are going to refuse service because you do not want to be complicit in sin, you cannot pick and choose the sins that you care about.
 
CatholicGeek1 said:
And I never said to do so. I said to make it a policy and post a sign or some such. If someone was obviously violating the policy, then kick them out.

My point was that you have to be consistent. If you are going to refuse service because you do not want to be complicit in sin, you cannot pick and choose the sins that you care about.
Click to expand...
enforcing that rule would be against the law. so if someone believes that renting a room to an unmarried or gay couple and assumes that sexual activity will happen, then he or she shouldn’t be in the business of public accommodation.

I don’t see the problem here. as you see it, Catholics shouldn’t be innkeepers because the law conflicts with their moral position. I disagree.

on another note, if I, in the company of a woman, tried to rent a room and the clerk asked me if we were married, I’d tell that employee it was none of his or her business, that the question was insulting to my companion, and if the room weren’t rented, he’d be out of a job and the hotel would be paying big damages.

F/
 
Fairwinds said:
enforcing that rule would be against the law. so if someone believes that renting a room to an unmarried or gay couple and assumes that sexual activity will happen, then he or she shouldn’t be in the business of public accommodation.

I don’t see the problem here. as you see it, Catholics shouldn’t be innkeepers because the law conflicts with their moral position. I disagree.

on another note, if I, in the company of a woman, tried to rent a room and the clerk asked me if we were married, I’d tell that employee it was none of his or her business, that the question was insulting to my companion, and if the room weren’t rented, he’d be out of a job and the hotel would be paying big damages.

F/
Click to expand...
I think you are misunderstanding my point. I do not think that people should be refusing service to people. I especially do not think they should do so based solely on something like sexual orientation.

The point that I was making was that IF you are going to refuse service, and claim that it is on religious grounds, you need to refuse service to all people who may engage in a sinful act on your premises. If you read all of my earlier posts, you will see what I am saying.

I have already said that enforcement would be a problem. I also think that if you have been reading my posts from the beginning you would see that I am not advocating this approach, merely suggesting that I think this would be the only legitimate way to go about it IF you were going to make such a decision.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top