Kroger sued by christians after refusing to wear rainbow flag pin

[libertysnake]

So, I'm of two minds here.

On one hand, it's the company's rules and their property. They can ask you to wear whatever they want.

However, given the courts are enforcing discrimination charges such as the case of "Masterpiece Cakeshop vs Colorado Civil Rights Comission", my view is that it's an all or nothing deal. Since that case opened the ethical pandora's box of "If you feel discriminated against, then you can force someone to do as you please," then my view is open the flood gates until the courts realize their error.

So while I ethically think Kroger can do whatever it wants, their arm should be twisted in the interest of applying the "Masterpiece Cakeshop vs Colorado Civil Rights Comission" results across the board, ad neausem, till the courts finally cave.

Let the liberals eat the shit they made, till they become libertarians.

 

[BDinPutnam]

Masterpiece is a case where the customer was trying to force the business to do something the business didn't want to do. Very much distinguishable here.

 

[Catskillkid]

This is not going to be a popular statement:

Saying it is genetic is a cop out. It's somehow supposed to justify behavior that goes against perpetuation of the species.
And make no mistake, once you get past the Valentine's Day shit, marriage, etc., the sole purpose of "gender" and "attraction" is to mate and reproduce. (kinda takes the glamour out of it, doesn't it!)
You may be Bill Gates rich, but if you haven't created offspring you are a genetic failure (whether by choice or 'other').

What they claim as natural is really a natural genetic anomaly that occurs when a population is so over-reproducing it threatens survival of the whole species. What they celebrate and encourage is actually nature's attempt at reducing the population.

Now, here's where it gets REALLY offensive:
If you claim you were "born a woman in a man's body" what you are doing is loudly proclaiming to the world that you have a mental defect. When you go and have cosmetic surgery (and yes, it is ONLY cosmetic...you are still a man, just without the man-bits) to turn you into some facsimile of the female form you are really just submitting yourself to self-mutilation.
Normally, when someone tries self-mutilation, we get them counseling. Now we are expected to not only support it, but to announce to the world how "right" it is.

sorry. I guess my environmental training was too strong.

Now, I can accept if two CONSENTING ADULTS want to have a relationship. Hell, I don't even care if they want to get "married" (which is a man-made creation designed to assist in child-rearing, but also designed to subjugate people into specific religions). Just don't go throwing it into my face at every turn.
(Ever notice how pretty much EVERY T.V. show nowadays has to have not one, but MANY homosexual relationships?)

When people try to argue that allowing homosexual marriage will somehow lead to marrying children they conveniently forget about the whole "CONSENTING ADULT" thing. Children cannot consent, legally. No matter how "mature" they look or act.

Ultimately, humanity is going to have to make a VERY hard decision. One that Nations like China and Japan have already had to face.
Self limit your population or risk having the whole of our species fail.

Did you ever hear about the work of John B. Calhoun? John B. Calhoun - Wikipedia. I think you'd find his work very interesting.

He worked for the National Institutes for Mental Health (NIMH) in the 1950s and 1960s and experimented on rats and mice. One of his landmark studies was with mice to see how population density affected behavior. The Cliff Notes version is that he conducted experiments where he put mice in a "perfect" habitat in the lab with plenty of food, water, no predators and good conditions for mice. He introduced a small population of both male and female mice. In the beginning they were all healthy and reproduced rapidly. Then came a point where the population began to level off and they stopped reproducing as rapidly, even though technically speaking there was still space and he continually gave them plenty of food and water for the growing population. What he noticed is that many of the mice began to exhibit homosexual behavior (more so than normal), males stopped being aggressive in defending their territory and ceased courtship rituals, females became more aggressive and took on my masculine traits and also ceased courtship rituals, and other abhorrent behavior occured such as parents purposefully wounding young mice. At a certain point reproduction ceased completely and the population basically fell into the categories of either fighting one another to the death or being so passive they just laid around eating and grooming themselves excessively until they died. The population went extinct even in "perfect" conditions.

Calhoun believed that these studies show what could happen to human populations that, even with adequate amounts of food and water, if they are continually placed into more dense living situations too close to others they'll eventually resort to similar types of behavior and the population will collapse. In a sense, increasing amounts of aggressiveness/passivity and homosexual behavior is nature's way of "righting" the population.

Personally, I can see that now somewhat with the apparent increase in homosexual behavior and the number of people (particularly children) identifying as gay or transgender. To be fair there has always been homosexuality (look at all the Roman emperors and nobility that preferred to have sex with other men) but it seems more so today than in the past. You can also see it in places like Japan (a very densely populated and urbanized nation) where many of the young males (often referred to as "parasite males") do nothing but hang out with other males and spend too much time buying clothes and changing their style (in essence spending all day grooming themselves for the sake of grooming not to find a mate). You can also look at many of the younger females in today's society who have become aggressive and taken on male traits (look at basically any Womyns' Studies Department on a college campus or even in the workplace...lord knows I have examples from my workplace). Part of it is certainly socialization and the pushing of Marxist and Feminist ideology but part of it, in my opinion, is that there are too many people on this earth and most of them are packed into mega cities where they live on top of one another. Human beings are programed by evolution to want to live in small(ish) villages. The environment we've created for ourselves is destined to turn into a feedback loop that will cause a population collapse.

In darkly humorous way, Calhoun's work loosely inspired a children's book called Mrs. Frisbee and the Rats of NIMH which in turn inspired a children's cartoon (I remember watching it when I was a child). It really had nothing to do with Calhoun's experiments and instead had to do with super intelligent rats. Still, knowing what I know now it's deeply disturbing that they took research that talks about the end of man and turned it into a cute children's show.

 

[Saltwater60]

So, I'm of two minds here.

On one hand, it's the company's rules and their property. They can ask you to wear whatever they want.

However, given the courts are enforcing discrimination charges such as the case of "Masterpiece Cakeshop vs Colorado Civil Rights Comission", my view is that it's an all or nothing deal. Since that case opened the ethical pandora's box of "If you feel discriminated against, then you can force someone to do as you please," then my view is open the flood gates until the courts realize their error.

So while I ethically think Kroger can do whatever it wants, their arm should be twisted in the interest of applying the "Masterpiece Cakeshop vs Colorado Civil Rights Comission" results across the board, ad neausem, till the courts finally cave.

Let the liberals eat the shit they made, till they become libertarians.

I agree with you to an extent but you can’t be discriminated against for certain things and if the left is using these to their advantage conservatives should have that same right. I think this is basically what you are saying as well.
I work for government and if I have a claim against a protected class of person it is handled differently if some one complains about me. They can’t have it both ways.

I was just talking with my wife about this today. She wants to hire a more diverse crowd at her job so she reached out to two black people she knows about the job. She was then saying oh I heard these other white people might be interested in as well. They aren’t supposed to recruit for a job internally so she wasn’t going to reach out to the white people. I said if you want it fair you reach out to both. Just reaching out to the black friends you have is not fair.

 

[Grimscale]

Did you ever hear about the work of John B. Calhoun?

Yeah, I heard of it. I actually read it. And you are right, it is almost spot-on for what is going on with the human race right now.


And I actually enjoyed the Nimh book. Among other things it gives a differing viewpoint into what happens in some "animal experiment" labs (Plague Dogs by Richard Adams is another that shows what happened in some labs, and is another good story).

 

[Marine Cpl]

I’m just curious. If you owned a business and wanted your employees to let’s say wear a logo on their provided work shirt that had a symbol of a fallen soldier, and two of your employees refused to wear it, would you can them? Would you have a right to can them for refusing to wear the company uniform

The insert your name here ________ Chain of Supermarkets proudly supports it’s soldiers currently deployed overseas.

For the record, I would just quit if they wanted me to wear a rainbow pin in support of LGBT and I strongly felt against it.

 

[Criticalt]

I’m just curious. If you owned a business and wanted your employees to let’s say wear a logo on their provided work shirt that had a symbol of a fallen soldier, and two of your employees refused to wear it, would you can them? Would you have a right to can them for refusing to wear the company uniform

The insert your name here ________ Chain of Supermarkets proudly supports it’s soldiers currently deployed overseas.

For the record, I would just quit if they wanted me to wear a rainbow pin in support of LGBT and I strongly felt against it.

Agreed
If a private company requests you wear a uniform, wear it or get out.

 

[Saltwater60]

I’m just curious. If you owned a business and wanted your employees to let’s say wear a logo on their provided work shirt that had a symbol of a fallen soldier, and two of your employees refused to wear it, would you can them? Would you have a right to can them for refusing to wear the company uniform

The insert your name here ________ Chain of Supermarkets proudly supports it’s soldiers currently deployed overseas.

For the record, I would just quit if they wanted me to wear a rainbow pin in support of LGBT and I strongly felt against it.

I would never make something like that mandatory.
Although I do largely agree with your sentiments. I’m just glad to see our side pulling the shit that the left does.

 

[1911guy]

You shouldn't be forced to wear anythjng but a fucking name tag.

That's indecent!

 

[Jcp123]

You shouldn't be forced to wear anythjng but a fucking name tag.

Pretty much, or other regalia directly related to the job, such as achievement pins. I would consider myself to the left of here, certainly, and of the general population, most likely on LGBT stuff, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that neither your thoughts on the subject nor mine would have any bearing whatsoever on job performance, so making it part of the work apparel wouldn’t be up my alley in the least.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I

Pretty much, or other regalia directly related to the job, such as achievement pins. I would consider myself to the left of here, certainly, and of the general population, most likely on LGBT stuff, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that neither your thoughts on the subject nor mine would have any bearing whatsoever on job performance, so making it part of the work apparel wouldn’t be up my alley in the least.

I agree. As a smart business owner, you should be 100 percent neutral and welcoming of anyone if you want to make the most money possible which is the whole purpose of why you started up a business to begin with. Leave politics out of it.

With that said, being a less than savvy business owner isn’t illegal. If you want to make statements that can affect your business’s bottom dollar, that’s entirely up to you and your right to do so.