General Chat (Non-Music-Related)

would it be objectionable, for a ISP provider to refuse internet service to a gay or LGBT couple, if it is ok for prejudicial business owners to refuse wedding ceremonies and banquets? based on sexual and social preferences?.. I don't know if most ISP are large companies, but back in the day my internet service provider was a small mom and pop internet provider, not needing a corporate board to keep them in check as per moral issues.. maybe they could just keep you off the internet if they had a monopoly in the area.. maybe all the small moralistic family run providers have been bought out and therefore, no need to worry, I am neither a gay or LGBT person, but man it is sad when you are made to be left out if you have not broken any CIVIL LAWS of the land..LOL

In a country that was actually free I'd have to say yes. Not that I would recommend anyone doing that but freedom of association means a lot. It's more important now than ever since Americans have difficulty understanding telling right from wrong these days.

Good old profit motive has a way of sorting most of it out in the end. To paraphrase Lenin, somewhere a greedy capitalist if manufacturing ropes to be used for hanging greedy capitalists.

Talbot

"would it be objectionable, for a ISP provider to refuse internet service to a gay or LGBT couple..."

I do not know how that could apply to supporting or contributing to a same sex ceremony. All the fuss is over supplying a service to only one specific function, and that being a wedding ceremony. You want to provide an internet feed for the wedding? Why would anyone want to do that? I'm sure almost everyone there would have smart phones to take care of that.

If you truly wish to know, why on earth are you asking us? Why not get on the telephone and begin calling those who provide the service that you are questioning? Ask them.

All involved stated that they would not have any problems serving gays outside of the ceremony itself. So if they come into your restaurant to eat, no problem. If they want internet service, no problem, if they want you to come see their baseball game, no problem, if they want to throw a party and invite you, no problem if you want to go. If you do not wish to hang with them or if you do, no problem.

It seems like there are one or two gay folk on every TV sit com these days. Where are the people storming the studios? They aren't there because most Americans haven't much of a problem with sexuality. In fact, the gays are made to look silly on many sit coms. WHAT??? No one complaining about that?? No trashed or burning television studios?

Americans seem to take gayness with a grain of salt, until they begin taking away the rights of citizens.

Now how about asking how other countries feel about them? Many officials have stated that they do not have gays in their countries. At least not any that are proclaiming their gayness outwardly. (Or at the least not many still residing above ground) In fact, I'd bet that gays strive to appear as normal as can be in those countries as opposed to some of the in your face variety often found in America.

Maybe those are places are where the activists should really be going to encourage acceptance of lgbt agendas.

"would it be objectionable, for a ISP provider to refuse internet service to a gay or LGBT couple..."

I do not know how that could apply to supporting or contributing to a same sex ceremony. All the fuss is over supplying a service to only one specific function, and that being a wedding ceremony. You want to provide an internet feed for the wedding? Why would anyone want to do that? I'm sure almost everyone there would have smart phones to take care of that.

If you truly wish to know, why on earth are you asking us? Why not get on the telephone and begin calling those who provide the service that you are questioning? Ask them.

All involved stated that they would not have any problems serving gays outside of the ceremony itself. So if they come into your restaurant to eat, no problem. If they want internet service, no problem, if they want you to come see their baseball game, no problem, if they want to throw a party and invite you, no problem if you want to go. If you do not wish to hang with them or if you do, no problem.

It seems like there are one or two gay folk on every TV sit com these days. Where are the people storming the studios? They aren't there because most Americans haven't much of a problem with sexuality. In fact, the gays are made to look silly on many sit coms. WHAT??? No one complaining about that?? No trashed or burning television studios?

Americans seem to take gayness with a grain of salt, until they begin taking away the rights of citizens.

Now how about asking how other countries feel about them? Many officials have stated that they do not have gays in their countries. At least not any that are proclaiming their gayness outwardly. (Or at the least not many still residing above ground) In fact, I'd bet that gays strive to appear as normal as can be in those countries as opposed to some of the in your face variety often found in America.

Maybe those are places are where the activists should really be going to encourage acceptance of lgbt agendas.

.. can't wait for a LGBT couple that are black get refused a wedding ceremony, and then suing the heck out of the homophobic pizza parlor owners over race and not sexual preference..
no shirt, no shoes, no service, and if you are gay get lost!

would it be objectionable, for a ISP provider to refuse internet service to a gay or LGBT couple, if it is ok for prejudicial business owners to refuse wedding ceremonies and banquets? based on sexual and social preferences?.. I don't know if most ISP are large companies, but back in the day my internet service provider was a small mom and pop internet provider, not needing a corporate board to keep them in check as per moral issues.. maybe they could just keep you off the internet if they had a monopoly in the area.. maybe all the small moralistic family run providers have been bought out and therefore, no need to worry, I am neither a gay or LGBT person, but man it is sad when you are made to be left out if you have not broken any CIVIL LAWS of the land..LOL

Let me remind you of the most important fact of this story: Not a single gay person has been discriminated against.

Not...even...one.

We all know that muslim bakeries refuse any behavior that goes against their religion, but these same leftist hypocrites are afraid to confront them. Since none of this rage is expressed at them, we should all be able to see that it's about attacking the freedom of Christians specifically. The word for that is "discrimination" and in this case it's closer to persecution.

Should anyone be forced to take a part, however small or large, in any activity they personally disapprove of? It's not about refusing to sell to a person, it's about being forced to participate in a behavior that goes against one's conscience.

I really wish that everyone would just be patient with each other, and learn to respect and love like the Lord loves us...but that is not being practical because many don't acknowledge the existence of God. However, there are 6 billion people who identify with a belief in the supernatural. Do you suppose they should have no rights of conscience? That isn't being practical either.

If someone doesn't want my business, for whatever offensive reason they want to give, I still have the freedom to bring my business elsewhere. The reporter who invented this non-story could have found a dozen other businesses (if they had tried) owned by Christians where this hypothetical would have gotten a different answer.

If I want a halal muslim to make me a ham sandwich, he has the right to refuse.
If I want a gay baker to make a cake that says "homosexuality is wrong", he has the right to refuse.
If I ask a Jewish baker to make a cake that says "Hail Jesus", he can refuse
If I ask a Christian to make a cake that says "I love your wife" he can refuse.

The underlying principle of "Freedom OF Religion" is being pushed aside by emotional manipulation, using the worst stereotypes of Christians possible. There is a very good reason why the framers of the Constitution paired "Freedom of Speech" and "Freedom OF Religion" together in the very first Article.

Where can we find tolerance for the First Amendment?

Ted in answer to your last question... The extreme controllers are coming out of the closet. The goal is to undue the first amendment and every article of the constitution. It has already been stated it is a pesky document, and it is so outdated.

Thanks for the good , logical points you have been making. I know your songs and music have not been falling on deaf ears...