A lot of talk about beliefs and protected classes in this thread, so let me throw out some hypotheticals...

 

- Scenario 1: A business owner firmly believes with every fiber of their being that whites and blacks are not equal. Should they be able to refuse service to one race due to their beliefs?

 

- Scenario 2: An atheist business owner refuses to serve Christians. Should that be allowed?

 

If the answer is no, then why should a business be able to tell gays, "sorry, no dice"?

 

Neither of your scenarios concerns a religious conviction. The atheist has no religious convictions so his religious freedoms are not being infringed upon, right? As to your first example your are talking a belief rather than a religious teaching.

 

There is a lot of confusion on here about beliefs vs religious rights.

I'm really concerned about things going forward after the Hobby Lobby decision and laws like these that we might start seeing lawsuits that address the concepts of "religious tests" or something like that. How do we verify or gauge belief? Do we need to judicially determine whether beliefs are sincere? Do we have to determine whether refused service was due to discrimination or other factors and how can we decide?

 

Really strange judicial times ahead...

 

Yep, might be a good time to be an attorney and specialize in this law as it develops.

Neither of your scenarios concerns a religious conviction. The atheist has no religious convictions so his religious freedoms are not being infringed upon, right? As to your first example your are talking a belief rather than a religious teaching.

 

There is a lot of confusion on here about beliefs vs religious rights.

 

How is providing service to a gay person infringing upon your religious beliefs in any way, shape, or form?

Darn those minorities, anyway. Why can't they just die, or absent that, go someplace else?

 

That's not what I'm saying at all and you know it. believe it or not I really have no problem with gay marriage. I do have a problem when people that object to if for firmly held religious beliefs are forced to give tacit approval to it by being forced to take part in the ritual simply because they own a business.

How is providing service to a gay person infringing upon your religious beliefs in any way, shape, or form?

 

I don't think it is in most, maybe all cases. But I do allow that there are some very religious people who are taught and believe that being gay, and in particular gay marriage, is a sin.

How is providing service to a gay person infringing upon your religious beliefs in any way, shape, or form?

 

That doesn't. But if you're compelled to participate in a ceremony or ritual your being compelled to give tacit approval to it.

I have worked at a service oriented business in Kentucky, and now in Indiana.

 

In these businesses, there are employees and owners and managers involved of all faiths, religious and moral convictions. I find it interesting that the industry in which I've been involved in for over 25 years has managed to provide services to every single one of the protected groups, and at times have made accommodation that hasn't been a standard for us.

 

The issue comes down to this:

 

IF one is of a moral conviction or religious conviction at odds with a potential client base, why would one choose that business? IF those convictions are that strong, it seems one would find a new enterprise.

 

All that said, if called as a defendant in a discrimination suit, the burden of proof is on the offended party to prove that discrimination. IF one chooses to deny a piece of business, I would think that one could find a business reason that does not imply discrimination.

Serious question.

 

Is baking a cake considered to be part of a religious marriage ritual?

That doesn't. But if you're compelled to participate in a ceremony or ritual your being compelled to give tacit approval to it.

 

No you aren't. You're doing the job you started a business to do. Nothing more, nothing less.

I have worked at a service oriented business in Kentucky, and now in Indiana.

 

In these businesses, there are employees and owners and managers involved of all faiths, religious and moral convictions. I find it interesting that the industry in which I've been involved in for over 25 years has managed to provide services to every single one of the protected groups, and at times have made accommodation that hasn't been a standard for us.

 

The issue comes down to this:

 

IF one is of a moral conviction or religious conviction at odds with a potential client base, why would one choose that business? IF those convictions are that strong, it seems one would find a new enterprise.

 

All that said, if called as a defendant in a discrimination suit, the burden of proof is on the offended party to prove that discrimination. IF one chooses to deny a piece of business, I would think that one could find a business reason that does not imply discrimination.

 

In reality this is what has and will continue but I do think we will continue to see more lawsuits challenging these refusals.

No you aren't. You're doing the job you started a business to do. Nothing more, nothing less.

Your opinion. I disagree

In reality this is what has and will continue but I do think we will continue to see more lawsuits challenging these refusals.

 

I agree. That's been the case forever. And that's why 1) I think these laws are more for "show" than anything and 2) why I think there was such an outcry from the LGBT community. The way the Indiana law was originally passed, it allowed for blatant discrimination in some cases.

 

The fact of the matter is, in the business world, there are a variety of reasons one would choose to pass on a piece of business. But as a secular country, not one who governs based upon religious beliefs, there will be conflicts not rooted in a strict secular line of reasoning.

Let's take homosexuality out of the equation for a minute. This is something I've been turning over in my head...

 

I'm a Roman Catholic who runs a print shop. Two people, a man and a woman, come into my store one day and ask me to print 5,000 leaflets for them to distribute. They're essentially open invitations to an event:

 

"Marriage is outdated and so is monogamy! Come down to the First Annual Swingers Con at the Fair and Expo Center. We've rented out the entire East Wing and we're all just gonna get nude and see what happens! Next Friday Nite!"

 

I find this to be repellant and seriously in contradiction to my convictions regarding sexuality and the sacrament of marriage. What are my options?

 

I think most people would agree that I can just send them on their way and politely say that I don't really want to print that message on a flyer at my shop.

 

Now let's place the political issue of homosexuality back into the equation while still retaining the premise above:

 

Two men enter my print shop and present me with the following flyer, of which they'd like 5,000 copies printed up:

 

"Marriage is outdated! We don't want to get married or follow any of your other hetero-normative nonsense! Come down to the Fair and Expo Center for an evening of fun and fornicating free of the mundane monogamy being shoved in our faces all the time. Friday Nite!

*Brought to you by the group, Gays Against Gay Marriage*

 

I politely decline, saying that I do believe that marriage is important and I don't want to print or endorse anything suggesting that something I believe to be a holy sacrament is anything other than beautifully sacred.

 

Do I have the same problem as before... or do I have a new problem?

Serious question.

 

Is baking a cake considered to be part of a religious marriage ritual?

No but singing at a marriage certainly would be and now a singer of faith could be compelled to sing at a same sex wedding.

Your opinion. I disagree

 

Modern America, where we no longer worry about praying to an invisible deity, because we're all supposed to be worshiping the invisible hand...