Here’s one to think about.  The law is the law. Read the story, use the link and see comments there.

 

1. I hate haters.

   Posted by Dr. Jeff       03/23/2010  at  04:42 PM  



2. As I stated before, even though I am generally Pro-Homosexual marraige (as long as the churches doing the marraige approve), I feel it is ultimately the property owner’s decision on whom to serve.

   I don’t believe what was done with smart (a Homosexual’s money is just as good as any other, ja?), but it is her business, and she has the privledge to deny service to any individual within reason (and by within reason I mean I do believe it is inhumane to deny someone the use of either the bathroom or medicinal facilities if they require it, and nourishment if it is obvious they are in dire straits), and as such I believe she was well within her boundaries, however I may dislike said boundaries.

   And doubtless the couple shall take their business elsewhere, which is the only truly appropriate punishment for this. The law shouldn’t get involved.

   Posted by Turtler       03/23/2010  at  04:47 PM  



3. Turtler has (once again) hit the nail on the head.  It is a property rights issue.  It is their property and their business and they should reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.  And the only legal recourse should be to take one’s money elsewhere.

   Posted by Guido       03/23/2010  at  07:27 PM  



4. That was in the pre Bizarro days of world history guys and you know it. Now the state tells us what we can and will do with that property we pretend to claim is ours.Garbage goes here and only on monday. Roof is 4 meters tall and no more. Taxes are paid by _ /__/__ or we take it and you go into the street. Talk back and we toss your ass in jail till you shut the fuck up and apologize. Pay the fine,go home, and maybe we will let you keep that property for a bit longer. Or maybe we will let the gypsies or the muzzies have it just to piss you off.
   THATS THE REAL WORLD NOW BOYS!!

   Posted by Rich K       03/23/2010  at  11:20 PM  



5. Notice how it is only Christians, it seems, who are to accommodate everyone else - not the other way around.

   I agree with the couple, it is their property, in essence their home - they have the right.

   And the ‘special interest group’ has the right to take their money elsewhere - from where I sit - it is a win-win situation and the law does not need to get involved.

   Posted by wardmama4       03/24/2010  at  06:31 AM  



6. Let us now see how the Islamic community would deal with the idea of a couple of homosexuals checking into their hotel.

   What?  No outcry?  No threats?

   Even after the stoning and beheading?

   Hmmmmm.

   Posted by heldmyw       03/24/2010  at  08:43 AM  



7. It isn’t the ppl who call themselves gay I dislike. In fact, on a personal level so long as I don’t have to view their public kissing as another way of showing how empowered they are, what they do privately isn’t my business. But I confess to having hatred for the civil and human rights groups who I really do believe are disingenuous. Maybe I should say that many of them are.  The ones calling and threatening the couple here for example. And I absolutely can’t find any other emotion aside from pure hate for the aclu and civil rights attorneys who insist on social engineering our countries to the extreme.

   Posted by peiper       03/24/2010  at  09:09 AM  



8. As long as the gays don’t shove their behavior in my face, I have no problem with them. But no one has a right to frak with what GOD HIMSELF instituted prior to the fall into Sin.

   Posted by Macker       03/24/2010  at  11:02 AM  

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.