T-Shirt Company Discriminated Against Gay Pride Organization, Hearing Officer Rules


#1

A Kentucky T-shirt company discriminated against a gay pride organization when it refused to print shirts promoting the group’s upcoming event, a hearing officer in the human rights case ruled last week.

opposingviews.com/i/religion/christian-company-refused-print-t-shirts-ky-gay-pride-event-vows-fight-discrimination-rul

It looks like the gay rights activists are bullying those who disagree with them again! :mad:


#2

The solution is for businesses not to break the law by discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. :shrug:


#3

The Human Rights Commission found the company guilty of discrimination, ruling that it “violated the city’s fairness ordinance, which prohibits businesses open to the public from discriminating against people based on sexual orientation.”

How do you creatively translate that into: "gay rights activists bullying those who disagree with them again!"?
Amazing.

The owner of the store said “the message of the shirts conflicted with his Christian beliefs.”
The shirt’s message said, “Lexington Pride Festival” on the front, with a graphic of a numeral 5.
How is that conflicting with Christian beliefs?

Monsignor Bruno Forte, appointed by the Pope as the synod’s special secretary, said today that a homosexual’s “dignity must be recognized and promoted.”

A Pride Festival would come under that definition, methinks.

.


#4

These companies have every right to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. This is an example of just discrimination.


#5

forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=914171

I believe this may be the same story posted October 10th, just noting, it had a few pages of comments.


#6

Yes, you would think so… But this is because we have an overreaching government that can tell you how to run your private business. This is not what the founders of our country envisioned.


#7

Civil Disobedience means not following unjust laws.
People who opt for persecution rather than violate their faith are courageous.


#8

Standard question #5: If this had been a Jewish owner refusing to print T-shirts for an Aryan Nation rally, would you still claim that the law was being broken?


#9

What law would have been broken first? Aryan Nation isn’t a sexual orientation, or even comparable.


#10

ROTF in a big way, here.

You are comparing a group that the FBI considers a “terrorist threat” and has been called the “first truly nationwide terrorist network” in the US…
…with a group of people who have a sexual orientation for which the Catholic Catechism officially confirms, “must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity”.

The owners are not being reprimanded because they are Christian…
The problem is that they are judgmental, narrow-minded, unfair, and unthinking.

.


#11

Which is not against the law. If so most Liberals would have been jailed a long time ago


#12

While I generally don’t respond to stuff like this, here’s some advice:

Comments like this don’t address the thread or even the post that you quoted, it’s just a way to derail the thread and frankly a non-comment. It’s a “zinger” that’s replying to, well, nothing. You haven’t added anything to the conversation or thread, you haven’t addressed it in any way, you just made a comment that’s supposed to be taken as a “burn” but the only person you’re responding to is yourself.


#13

Week after week these same type of threads come up.

It does get kind of tiring and something a zinger just give you a chance to pause and then rejoin the conversation,

Church teaches us that you have to follow your faith and that includes not allowing a gay wedding if you own a resort type business.

Over and over many of the same people with a big “Catholic” that identifies their faith will say no, that is not what the church teaches. They will argue you blue in the face that owning a business requires charity, therefore you should allow a gay marriage be held there, that it is OK to march in gay pride parades and some, that it is OK to be in favor of gay marriage as an equal rights.

This couple was forced by the state to go to “diversity re-education” training as I recall in the last thread.


#14

But a “zinger” (that was in response to himself when it comes down to it) shouldn’t be used as a way to ignore or not address what was actually said. The post he (partly) quoted was about how it’s ridiculous to compare a sexual orientation to a terrorist group and how they weren’t being reprimanded because they were Christian. It was even brought up on this very page how it’s not because they’re Christian:

But this was ignored and the question hasn’t been answered.

If these threads keep on popping up, surely people should stop filling them up with pointless “zingers” and instead actually address the points brought up in them.


#15

originally posted by Ben Carmine
But a “zinger” (that was in response to himself when it comes down to it) shouldn’t be used as a way to ignore or not address what was actually said. The post he (partly) quoted was about how it’s ridiculous to compare a sexual orientation to a terrorist group and how they weren’t being reprimanded because they were Christian. It was even brought up on this very page how it’s not because they’re Christian:

You’ve lost me here. My understand is that couple was a Christian couple, which is why they did not want to do the tee-shirts.

It IS ridiculous to compare a hatefilled white supremacist group to a Christian couple.

Originally Posted by DaddyGirl
The Human Rights Commission found the company guilty of discrimination, ruling that it “violated the city’s fairness ordinance, which prohibits businesses open to the public from discriminating against people based on sexual orientation.”

How do you creatively translate that into: “gay rights activists bullying those who disagree with them again!”?
Amazing.

The owner of the store said “the message of the shirts conflicted with his Christian beliefs.”
The shirt’s message said, “Lexington Pride Festival” on the front, with a graphic of a numeral 5.
How is that conflicting with Christian beliefs?

Monsignor Bruno Forte, appointed by the Pope as the synod’s special secretary, said today that a homosexual’s “dignity must be recognized and promoted.”

A Pride Festival would come under that definition, methinks.

You have 1000 more posts than me but you are helping me to catch up.:smiley:

Many would see a Pride Event, any Pride event as being in favor of gay marriage and since we almost have gay marriage across the whole country, it would seem that these activist groups including the “Pride” have been very successful in getting into schools and into the media and proclaiming that to be against gay marraige is to be against gay rights

If you want to argue that the two are not related you can but there are many who would feel you can’t split hairs on this issue. Dignity involved dignity of all and the gay pride events do a lot to take away from the dignity of most humans by the way they dress and act. That alone will make me question the validity of doing a tee shirt for it.


#16

Members of the Aryan Nation are not a protected class under public accommodation law so no.


#17

Thank you for responding to my post it must have had a ring of truth to it.


#18

The solution is for businesses not to break the law by discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation.

They’re not. If they arbitrarily refused a service because the buyers were homosexual, that would be discrimination. In this case, they were being demanded to make a shirt that actively promoted homosexual acts. That’s the issue. It’s a different can of worms. Even if the people ordering the t-shirt were heterosexual, they would certainly still have refused to make it.

Monsignor Bruno Forte, appointed by the Pope as the synod’s special secretary, said today that a homosexual’s “dignity must be recognized and promoted.”

A Pride Festival would come under that definition, methinks.

Oho, nice try.

Recognising peoples’ dignity is not the same as promoting sinful acts. Going around claiming that people with same-sex attraction are subhuman monsters would be a violation of that, refusing to aid in the promotion of such acts would not be a violation.

Yet again, this whole thing boils down to a refusal to understand the difference between a person and a person’s actions. The issue is not the people themselves, but the actions on the part of said people that the t-shirt would implicitly promote.


#19

The Commission saw right through that argument. Have you read the decision? If not, you should.

That much we know isn’t true. As the decision points out, the owner has a history of making lewd t-shirts for heterosexual clients.


#20

That much we know isn’t true. As the decision points out, the owner has a history of making lewd t-shirts for heterosexual clients.

I meant the same t-shirt. What about that do you not understand? As in, if heterosexuals had demanded a t-shirt promoting a pride parade.

The Commission saw right through that argument.

Meaning they found it awkward and found a legalese way of avoiding it.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.