Is 2014 the year for gay marriage in ...

Is 2014 the year for gay marriage in Ohio?

There are 1160 comments on the The Marion Star story from Mar 1, 2014, titled Is 2014 the year for gay marriage in Ohio?. In it, The Marion Star reports that:

Robert Johnson-Keeton grew up in a religious community just outside Chillicothe.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Marion Star.

Fundies R Mentally Eel

Philadelphia, PA

#986 Mar 27, 2014
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Incorrectly in my opinion. Especially when it conflicts with property rights....I also believe that in general, an idea that has to be forced on someone is probably not a good one.
I only wish the right wingers litigating to be able to discriminate against lgbt people would do what you hilariously do, and openly conflate that silly issue of "religious" belief about serving lgbt people with any business owner wanting to discriminate against any other protected group...just on the owner's whim.

While there's little doubt that most of the homophobes pushing the former issue are racists and misogynists and christianists as well, such a conflation would put a quick end to the former, brewing issue. The latter issue is a total non starter.

I guess, while they rely on different "arguments," they are the same issue in a way. And the law regarding the government's interest in preventing this sort of overt discrimination is clear and long established. No serious players are challenging that principle...except when it comes to lgbt people and "religious" belief.

"An idea that has to be forced on someone is probably not a good one...."

As for the state compelling people, which is always "a bad idea": Of course you thought the required end to slavery, the required end to jim crow, the required income tax levies, the required environmental regulations for companies were bad ideas, because they were forced on people.

And there's a word for that sort of nutty reasoning - it starts with "Libertar" and ends with "Paul." Nutty.
Fundies R Mentally Eel

Philadelphia, PA

#987 Mar 27, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
only progressive man thinks they know better, and defy Gods law screaming unfair
Right, your posts are really Christian, perfect examples of the golden rule.

Also it's not only progressives. It's members of about every other religion on the planet who disagree in whole or in part with hypocritical fundie freeeks, as well as most Christians who disagree with hypocritical fundie freeeks, an increasingly isolated, deranged subset.
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#988 Mar 27, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
A swing, and a miss.
Freedom of association does not apply. This isn't a private club, it is a public business, which is a place of public accommodation.
Try again.
you forgot Mr. Shotgun who owns the building thinks different than you. Also pays the mortgage, taxes, and employees salary.

and you think you can tell them what they can and can't do with their business.

continue on.....it is better than any reality TV, and the final show is this November.

a business is not a place of public accommodation you idiot. A business is an income producing vessel for owners and employees, or it would not be there.

It is a private club, and it is called self employment. As an owner of my house, business, car, or what ever....it is not for you or the public accommodation. Mr. Shotgun says so....argue with him.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#989 Mar 27, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
you forgot Mr. Shotgun who owns the building thinks different than you. Also pays the mortgage, taxes, and employees salary.
And?
Reality Speaks wrote:
and you think you can tell them what they can and can't do with their business. continue on.....it is better than any reality TV, and the final show is this November.
No, I don't. I do think that the state has the right to prevent them from discrimination on the basis of any number of criteria, including sexuality.
Guess what, Reality, the courts have thus far agreed with me.
https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/asse...
Reality Speaks wrote:
a business is not a place of public accommodation you idiot.
Actually, guess again. If they open a shop in a public place to sell a product or service, and they do not require private membership, they are a place of public accommodation. Perhaps, you might take the time to understand the law, before you make juvenile claims and stick your foot in your mouth?
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/121...
What's the first item under 7 E?
Reality Speaks wrote:
A business is an income producing vessel for owners and employees, or it would not be there.
And as such, they would be idiots to turn away potential paying customers due to religious, political, or personal bias.
Reality Speaks wrote:
It is a private club, and it is called self employment.
Not so, Reality. No membership was required. The business in question is a place of public accommodation.
Reality Speaks wrote:
As an owner of my house, business, car, or what ever....it is not for you or the public accommodation. Mr. Shotgun says so....argue with him.
Your house and car aren't businesses.
Do you understand the difference between a business and business property and personal assets?
The only reason your house and car might be relevant is if you were being sued as a business that was not a corporation, so your personal assets were undistinguishable from those of the business. Even then it would only be an issue if your were being sued for damages.

On the whole, you don't seem terribly bright.
Xavier Breath

Brooklyn, NY

#990 Mar 27, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
you forgot Mr. Shotgun who owns the building thinks different than you. Also pays the mortgage, taxes, and employees salary.
and you think you can tell them what they can and can't do with their business.
continue on.....it is better than any reality TV, and the final show is this November.
a business is not a place of public accommodation you idiot. A business is an income producing vessel for owners and employees, or it would not be there.
It is a private club, and it is called self employment. As an owner of my house, business, car, or what ever....it is not for you or the public accommodation. Mr. Shotgun says so....argue with him.
Displaying your complete ignorance is really quite unnecessary.

"Place of public accommodation" means any inn, restaurant, eating house, barbershop, public conveyance by air, land, or water, theater, store, other place for the sale of merchandise, or any other place of public accommodation or amusement of which the accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges are available to the public.

It's part of Ohio's Revised Code. Check your facts BEFORE you post and you can save yourself much embarrassment.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#991 Mar 27, 2014
tranpsosition wrote:
<quoted text>
Could you cite this definition in state or federal law?
We all know what "public employee" means.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#992 Mar 27, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
you forgot Mr. Shotgun who owns the building thinks different than you. Also pays the mortgage, taxes, and employees salary.
and you think you can tell them what they can and can't do with their business.
Oh, they can... and they do... even those businesses they have no intention of ever patronizing... and they love the sense of control it gives them...

Perhaps someday...
Pappy

Mason, OH

#993 Mar 27, 2014
Here's what Merriam-Webster defines as public:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pub...

1pub·lic
adjective \&#712;p&#601;-blik\

: of, relating to, or affecting all or most of the people of a country, state, etc.

: of, relating to, paid for by, or working for a government

: supported by money from the government and from private contributors rather than by commercials

The legal definition is the second definition.

Judicial activist judges and other leftist use the casual definition of the word, which conveniently supports their totalitarian control over people and their private business practices. They also ignore the fact there is no constitutional basis for a central government to interfere in private business practice, nor does a central goverment have the delegated power to create and grant legal privileges to protected classes of people such as done through their diversity scheming.

The only part of a storefront business that is public is the sidewalk and maybe the real estate it occupies. The contract business is private and is not a government provided accomodation, although control freak leftist will argue otherwise. Leftist morons pretend the government is an unnamed third party in every private contract.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#994 Mar 27, 2014
Pappy wrote:
Here's what Merriam-Webster defines as public:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pub...
1pub·lic
adjective \&#712;p&#601;-blik\
: of, relating to, or affecting all or most of the people of a country, state, etc.
: of, relating to, paid for by, or working for a government
: supported by money from the government and from private contributors rather than by commercials
The legal definition is the second definition.
Judicial activist judges and other leftist use the casual definition of the word, which conveniently supports their totalitarian control over people and their private business practices. They also ignore the fact there is no constitutional basis for a central government to interfere in private business practice, nor does a central goverment have the delegated power to create and grant legal privileges to protected classes of people such as done through their diversity scheming.
The only part of a storefront business that is public is the sidewalk and maybe the real estate it occupies. The contract business is private and is not a government provided accomodation, although control freak leftist will argue otherwise. Leftist morons pretend the government is an unnamed third party in every private contract.
You're aware that Webster doesn't provide legal definitions? They're generally written into the relevant law or code, such as the one that has been provided for you earlier.
Buckeye at birth

Elkhart, IN

#995 Mar 27, 2014
Gay marriage ,it doesn't matter what the people want,the Leftist judges are going to ignor the majority,and pass it no matter what,it's all part of the Obama agenda...They ignored Propsition eight in California,and they are doing thye same in alot of other states as well.They only have three years to destroy America,and it's going to take more then votes to stop this attack on our freedoms,and the halt of this moral decay that this administration is imposing on us against our will.But we must get united,or we fall!!....America is the last place on Earthy where freedom still prevails,but for how long,and what price....we lose,it's gone forever........

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#996 Mar 27, 2014
Buckeye at birth wrote:
Gay marriage ,it doesn't matter what the people want,the Leftist judges are going to ignor the majority,and pass it no matter what,it's all part of the Obama agenda...They ignored Propsition eight in California,and they are doing thye same in alot of other states as well.<Further ranting truncated>
Do I have a right to vote on your free speech? Do I have a vote on your free exercise, your right to keep and bear arms, your right to be secure in your home and papers, etc? Of course not. Do you know why? Because the law has long held that some rights are too important for there to be the potential that a minority could be held hostage by a disapproving majority.

"The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials, and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections."
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/...

This has nothing to do with ignoring the majority (although you might also want to take a look at these http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm , and this for Ohio specifically http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/w... http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local... ), it has to do with providing all people equal protection of the law, as is required by the US Constitution.
Fundies R Mentally Eel

Philadelphia, PA

#997 Mar 27, 2014
Pappy wrote:
Here's what Merriam-Webster
Hey cretin, find a legal dictionary or hire a hom skool teechur to research, "place of public accommodation."

It means something more specific than public, but here we might say "public" to differentiate from "private," as in your house, your house of worship of hate, your personal relationships.

Liberal-activist [sic] judges did not come up with the category of place of public accommodations.

Unless David Duke and everyone to his right is your notion of a proper jurist....
Fundies R Mentally Eel

Philadelphia, PA

#998 Mar 27, 2014
Buckeye at birth wrote:
Gay marriage ,it doesn't matter what the people want,the Leftist judges are going to ignor the majority
You literally need a sixth grade civics class, Jethro. You do not understand the first things about our system of government.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#999 Mar 27, 2014
Buckeye at birth wrote:
Gay marriage ,it doesn't matter what the people want,the Leftist judges are going to ignor the majority,and pass it no matter what,it's all part of the Obama agenda...They ignored Propsition eight in California,and they are doing thye same in alot of other states as well.They only have three years to destroy America,and it's going to take more then votes to stop this attack on our freedoms,and the halt of this moral decay that this administration is imposing on us against our will.But we must get united,or we fall!!....America is the last place on Earthy where freedom still prevails,but for how long,and what price....we lose,it's gone forever........
You seem a little bitter over there on the wrong side of history...
Basta

Dublin, CA

#1000 Mar 27, 2014
Buckeye at birth wrote:
Gay marriage ,it doesn't matter what the people want,the Leftist judges are going to ignor the majority,and pass it no matter what,it's all part of the Obama agenda...They ignored Propsition eight in California,and they are doing thye same in alot of other states as well.They only have three years to destroy America,and it's going to take more then votes to stop this attack on our freedoms,and the halt of this moral decay that this administration is imposing on us against our will.But we must get united,or we fall!!....America is the last place on Earthy where freedom still prevails,but for how long,and what price....we lose,it's gone forever........
Hey Dufus,you forgot to mention that YOU are NOW in the minority ! What's it like to be in the minority ? Then go read the 14th Amendment to our Constitution you ignorant racist rube ! Constitution trumps bible ! Constitution trumps YOU ! Now go and hate NO more ! In this great country one cannot vote away the rights of a minority no matter how badly you want to !

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#1001 Mar 28, 2014
Buckeye at birth wrote:
America is the last place on Earthy where freedom still prevails
I used to hear this from the less educated quite a lot and always loved it. The idea that America is the only place with never-defined freedoms always tickled me. As if the map just went misty and indistinct at the borders, muddled by the lack of freedom.
Pappy

Mason, OH

#1003 Mar 28, 2014
tranpsosition wrote:
<quoted text>
You're aware that Webster doesn't provide legal definitions? They're generally written into the relevant law or code, such as the one that has been provided for you earlier.
Not true.

Post the evidence you have that the word "public" is defined as "people" from multiple reputable sources. Your equating of public = people redefinition is illogical based on any common sense. According to your re-definition of the word, a private bathroom could be construed to be a "people" accomodation and therefore a public accomodation.

Public (aka government provided) laws and regulations and policies regularly use PC language that is ambiguous or is doublespeak. If they weren't ambiguous, there would be no need for judges and lawyers; a computer could make judicial decisions instead if public (government provided) law words were not ambiguous. Leftist lawyers and their cohorts in congress often write laws in the US to create ambiguous and unconstitutional law, and do this intentionally to help their diversity cronies and to generate litigious revenue for themselves.

It should be illegal for professional lawyers to be in public law making positions, because it is a inherent conflict of interest. Lawyers make their living litigating law, and the more public (government provided) laws they create are more opportunities for them to litigate and make dirty money.

By the way, haven't you noticed the flock of queers that have descended on this thread, sniping with rating points? I can guess that at least half of these sniping queers are from out of state doing their typical glib sloganeering and cliche doubletalk, and their word-game spouting activities
Pappy

Mason, OH

#1004 Mar 28, 2014
tranpsosition wrote:
<quoted text>
You're aware that Webster doesn't provide legal definitions? They're generally written into the relevant law or code, such as the one that has been provided for you earlier.
As an example of their word gaming activities, media queers have re-defined the phrase "constitutional freedom" or "freedom" as representing their preferred elective abortion, pornography, fedgov-sponsored AIDS/HIV hysteria, sodomy, and hate speech prosecutions.

The popular queer-created phrase "anal sex" is an oxymoron, implying that their dirty asses and slithering tongues are sex organs.

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#1005 Mar 28, 2014
Pappy wrote:
<quoted text>
Not true.
Post the evidence you have that the word "public" is defined as "people" from multiple reputable sources. Your equating of public = people redefinition is illogical based on any common sense. According to your re-definition of the word, a private bathroom could be construed to be a "people" accomodation and therefore a public accomodation.
Public (aka government provided) laws and regulations and policies regularly use PC language that is ambiguous or is doublespeak. If they weren't ambiguous, there would be no need for judges and lawyers; a computer could make judicial decisions instead if public (government provided) law words were not ambiguous. Leftist lawyers and their cohorts in congress often write laws in the US to create ambiguous and unconstitutional law, and do this intentionally to help their diversity cronies and to generate litigious revenue for themselves.
It should be illegal for professional lawyers to be in public law making positions, because it is a inherent conflict of interest. Lawyers make their living litigating law, and the more public (government provided) laws they create are more opportunities for them to litigate and make dirty money.
By the way, haven't you noticed the flock of queers that have descended on this thread, sniping with rating points? I can guess that at least half of these sniping queers are from out of state doing their typical glib sloganeering and cliche doubletalk, and their word-game spouting activities
It's really true. Legal definitions aren't pulled from Websters. Nor the OED for laws out here. Quest was already kind enough to post a legal definition of public accommodation covering privately held properties, reading:

42 U.S. Code § 12181

(7) Public accommodation
The following private entities are considered public accommodations for purposes of this subchapter, if the operations of such entities affect commerce—
(A) an inn, hotel, motel, or other place of lodging, except for an establishment located within a building that contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and that is actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment as the residence of such proprietor;
(B) a restaurant, bar, or other establishment serving food or drink;
(C) a motion picture house, theater, concert hall, stadium, or other place of exhibition or entertainment;
(D) an auditorium, convention center, lecture hall, or other place of public gathering;
(E) a bakery, grocery store, clothing store, hardware store, shopping center, or other sales or rental establishment;
(F) a laundromat, dry-cleaner, bank, barber shop, beauty shop, travel service, shoe repair service, funeral parlor, gas station, office of an accountant or lawyer, pharmacy, insurance office, professional office of a health care provider, hospital, or other service establishment;
(G) a terminal, depot, or other station used for specified public transportation;
(H) a museum, library, gallery, or other place of public display or collection;
(I) a park, zoo, amusement park, or other place of recreation;
(J) a nursery, elementary, secondary, undergraduate, or postgraduate private school, or other place of education;
(K) a day care center, senior citizen center, homeless shelter, food bank, adoption agency, or other social service center establishment; and
(L) a gymnasium, health spa, bowling alley, golf course, or other place of exercise or recreation.

Arguing that a public accommodation means a governmental entity, because governmental is a valid definition of the word public makes as little sense as saying that public accommodation only applies to housing, because a valid definition of accommodation is housing.
Pappy

Mason, OH

#1006 Mar 28, 2014
tranpsosition wrote:
<quoted text>
It's really true. Legal definitions aren't pulled from Websters. Nor the OED for laws out here. Quest was already kind enough to post a legal definition of public accommodation covering privately held properties, reading:
42 U.S. Code § 12181
(7) Public accommodation
The following private entities are considered public accommodations for purposes of this subchapter, if the operations of such entities affect commerce—
(A) an inn, hotel, motel, or other place of lodging, except for an establishment located within a building that contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and that is actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment as the residence of such proprietor;
(B) a restaurant, bar, or other establishment serving food or drink;
(C) a motion picture house, theater, concert hall, stadium, or other place of exhibition or entertainment;
(D) an auditorium, convention center, lecture hall, or other place of public gathering;
(E) a bakery, grocery store, clothing store, hardware store, shopping center, or other sales or rental establishment;
(F) a laundromat, dry-cleaner, bank, barber shop, beauty shop, travel service, shoe repair service, funeral parlor, gas station, office of an accountant or lawyer, pharmacy, insurance office, professional office of a health care provider, hospital, or other service establishment;
(G) a terminal, depot, or other station used for specified public transportation;
(H) a museum, library, gallery, or other place of public display or collection;
(I) a park, zoo, amusement park, or other place of recreation;
(J) a nursery, elementary, secondary, undergraduate, or postgraduate private school, or other place of education;
(K) a day care center, senior citizen center, homeless shelter, food bank, adoption agency, or other social service center establishment; and
(L) a gymnasium, health spa, bowling alley, golf course, or other place of exercise or recreation.
Arguing that a public accommodation means a governmental entity, because governmental is a valid definition of the word public makes as little sense as saying that public accommodation only applies to housing, because a valid definition of accommodation is housing.
You need to try and focus.

I said you and other queer supporters are claiming that the word "public" is equal to "people". I also asked you to post from a reputable source the definition of the word "public", but instead you posted a definition of "public accomodation" from an unamed source that is quoted by a resident queer supporter.

Laws and regulations penned by government sources, especially legislative bodies, are not reputable. There is a good reason that US lawyers and public servants have bad reputations.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What Do You Think of Donald Trump Now? 17 min Reality Speaks 106
News Ohioans to hold own version of Washington women... 20 min Reality Speaks 45
Obama Out Of Office Countdown Clock 28 min Reality Speaks 55
Trump plans to Remove WH Press Corps, hide TRUTH 38 min Reality Speaks 32
The Andersons are closing 1 hr 1 and 1 and 1 is 3 1
Does anyone know why Yolanda Harris is leaving ... 1 hr Deb 74
News Ohio judges often pick music to mask attorney s... 7 hr They cannot kill ... 1

Columbus Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Columbus Mortgages