What do you say?

[Saint Peter]

He should have butchered her hair.

Good for business? Who cares. It is fucking great for news conferences.

 

[TexasWife25]

You are a bastard sir.

My first inclination was no it is his business to tell her to fuck off. But it is somewhat discriminatory. If the tables were turned the fucking ACLU would be all over it. She should just go to a non sign waving hair stylist.

If the tables were turned? She be discriminating against him because hes gay, which is illegal. Last I checked, its still legal to refuse to do business with assholes.

 

[eyer]

You're mixing two things in your premise. Whether said governor is lesbian or not is irrelevant. Discriminating against all people of a specific group is wrong. Refusing service to an individual who pisses you off for a specific reason unique for that person (for instance, a politician who voted a specific way on an issue, or a celebrity who said something idiotic on TV, or whatever), is the businessman's perogative.

Most of the time it's probably bad business, though.

Wow...

...if you'd only informed me of such nutty squirrel wisdom before I posted this:

I'd still side with the private businessman doing business with whomever he desires...

See the word "still" italicized? That means I support the same premise in both situations, regardless of sexual politics or group circumstance, tree climber...

 

[DevilishTexan]

If the tables were turned? She be discriminating against him because hes gay, which is illegal. Last I checked, its still legal to refuse to do business with assholes.

Yeah that's the way your narrow eyes see it of course. But no, that's not the same thing nice try.

 

[TexasWife25]

Yeah that's the way your narrow eyes see it of course. But no, that's not the same thing nice try.

Open my eyes to the error of my ways, oh wise one.

 

[DevilishTexan]

Open my eyes to the error of my ways, oh wise one.

Don't have the time nor the inclination. You'll grow up one day.

 

[Ishmael]

He should have butchered her hair.

Good for business? Who cares. It is fucking great for news conferences.

Good point Petey, but he's not to have that opportunity now. Oddly enough this has cost him business in the gay community.

Ishmael

 

[phrodeau]

Good point Petey, but he's not to have that opportunity now. Oddly enough this has cost him business in the gay community.

Ishmael

That's because they found out that he used to do the Governor's hair.

 

[Liar]

Wow...

...if you'd only informed me of such nutty squirrel wisdom before I posted this:



See the word "still" italicized? That means I support the same premise in both situations, regardless of sexual politics or group circumstance, tree climber...

Yes. I pointed out that you throwing in that she was also a lesbian is a red herring.

Because it is.

 

[Ishmael]

That's because they found out that he used to do the Governor's hair.

No, it's because they've decided that he's stupid.

Ishmael

 

[eyer]

Yes. I pointed out that you throwing in that she was also a lesbian is a red herring.

Because it is.

I have absolutely no knowledge of whether the Gov is "a lesbian", nor did I state "she was" "a lesbian"...

...where did you read that?

 

[Ishmael]

To add a little spice to the discussion.

In 2006 a pair of lesbians decided to have a 'commitment' ceremony and asked a well respected Albuquerque photo studio to photograph the event. The studio respectfully declined. One of the women filed a complaint with the state civil rights commission and the commission fined the studio $6,600.

A little over a month ago the governor appointed an openly gay man to the state Public Service Commission. She caught all sorts of flack from certain sectors for that appointment. She appointed a person, in her opinion, that was best qualified for the position. That being the case it's hard to hang the 'homophobe' sign around her neck.

I happened to vote 'Yes' in the poll for reasons of 'fairness.'

Ishmael

 

[bg23]

Don't have the time nor the inclination. You'll grow up one day.

You had enough time to respond to her and type out probably about as many posts as you'd have needed to clarify the issue.

Her post to you was not rude, it addressed your point, you felt the need to argue with her and yet when asked to define your position you squirrelled and resorted straight to a personal attack.

If that wasn't an "Uhhhm derrrp I'm full of crap derrrrp" post I don't know what is.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I never waste any opportunity to fuck over Gays.

I know Gays whom I respect and admire, a few are outstanding. But most bring along their baggage and politicize it. LOVE ME, LOVE MY DOG.

When I was a youngster I tried to befriend them; that didnt work. When older I tried to go along and get along; that didnt work either. What really works is easing them out the door to practice their special magic with the competition. Gays dont recruit straights, they recruit other Gays.

 

[NewEnglandGirl]

My first, knee jerk reaction, was to say: He has the right to serve or deny whomever he chooses, as long as it is not on basis of class exclusion or inclusion.

But once I'd had the chance to read and think about the article, I realized that this had nothing to do with making a statement about his support or lack thereof of the governor. Had she come to him for the first time for a cut, I could still support his action, but she had been an ongoing customer. She has also made it clear through her appointment of an openly gay man that she does not have a problem with gays per se, but only their right to marry.

So... Essentially, my personal opinion is that this may have been a decision foolishly led from the heart... But I suspect that it was actually quite probably a calculated business decision, based on hoping to gain free advertising and support for his stance. And part of why I say that is because any business person with half a brain would have parlayed her prior patronage into a ton of free advertising for himself.

And that makes the initial poll inaccurate, because it presupposes discrimination, whereas that very well may not have been the case on either person's part. So, I support his right to make a stupid business move that may well end up costing him customers, because we all have that right, and not because he - or she - was being discriminatory.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Lets put it anuther way.

American feminists advocated for black civil rights and the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, then after the 14th Amendment was ratified black leaders refused to support equal rights for American women. Women waited anuther 50 years to vote.

SO! How kindly would you feel for any group that fucks you over? Is it wrong to get some payback from fags and Niggaz and Spics and perfessers?

 

[RobDownSouth]

And that makes the initial poll inaccurate, because it presupposes discrimination, whereas that very well may not have been the case on either person's part.

Bingo! Give this young lady a cookie.

 

[VoteForMe]

Not much of a story here. I do my do with a flowbee.

 

[NewEnglandGirl]

Bingo! Give this young lady a cookie.

The thing is, we have been trained throughout our lives to make snap decisions, to form immediate opinions. We have become a nation of small attention spans, ruled by fast action video games/movies/handheld devices and sound bites: shiny squirrels abound.

So, Ish's wording of the poll fits not just how we on the GB tend to think, but how Americans in general do. The point I was making was that it is important to look at the bigger picture, at what the other questions may be in each situation. To his full credit, we did get an "other" option, for those of us who were willing to look at the other questions. That being said, I still chose the first option, despite explaining my position.

 

[DevilishTexan]

You had enough time to respond to her and type out probably about as many posts as you'd have needed to clarify the issue.

Her post to you was not rude, it addressed your point, you felt the need to argue with her and yet when asked to define your position you squirrelled and resorted straight to a personal attack.

If that wasn't an "Uhhhm derrrp I'm full of crap derrrrp" post I don't know what is.

Yeah, yeah, blah, blah sue me.

 

[Cheyenne]

It really is quite simple...if you advertise in ANY form (yes, this includes a phone book) you MUST provide the service regardless of whether you approve of their opinion or not. If however, you do not advertise in ANY form, you are allowed to refuse service.

Your stupid ass rule is, well, stupid!

 

[Ishmael]

My first, knee jerk reaction, was to say: He has the right to serve or deny whomever he chooses, as long as it is not on basis of class exclusion or inclusion.

But once I'd had the chance to read and think about the article, I realized that this had nothing to do with making a statement about his support or lack thereof of the governor. Had she come to him for the first time for a cut, I could still support his action, but she had been an ongoing customer. She has also made it clear through her appointment of an openly gay man that she does not have a problem with gays per se, but only their right to marry.

So... Essentially, my personal opinion is that this may have been a decision foolishly led from the heart... But I suspect that it was actually quite probably a calculated business decision, based on hoping to gain free advertising and support for his stance. And part of why I say that is because any business person with half a brain would have parlayed her prior patronage into a ton of free advertising for himself.

And that makes the initial poll inaccurate, because it presupposes discrimination, whereas that very well may not have been the case on either person's part. So, I support his right to make a stupid business move that may well end up costing him customers, because we all have that right, and not because he - or she - was being discriminatory.

If that were the case it's backfired badly on him.

Obviously Martinez is not going to be filing any complaint, although in light of the 2006 case I would have liked to see her to do so. By not filing any complaint she is probably doing him considerably more damage business wise than had she gone ahead and filed. He's being denied the opportunity to play the martyr victimized by the 'mean ole' governor.

Ishmael

 

[Bidin~Time]

Paradox

He is free to deny service, but not free from the consequences (good and bad) of denying said service.

 

[Ishmael]

Paradox

He is free to deny service, but not free from the consequences (good and bad) of denying said service.

I have no idea what his thought processes were. If he'd of spent even a few minutes thinking it through he would have realized that almost every outcome of his actions were going to be negative for him.

First of all if you go back and read the blurb this guy is actually mad at Christie of New Jersey. And while Martinez may have agreed with Christie's veto of the gay marriage bill in New Jersey the fact is that this clown is trying to punish Christie by proxy. Exactly how does that work?

Martinez is hugely popular in the state, over 64% voter approval.

The gay community is tolerated in the state. The state has always been a little on the libertarian side politically. But that does not mean that the gay community is actively embraced. Gay marriage is NOT an issue in the state and it's highly unlikely that it will be anytime in the near future. The state does not have a citizen initiative process to place a referendum on the ballot and given the state demographics there will be nothing forthcoming via the legislative process. So in reality whether Martinez agrees with Christie is a moot point in that she will never have a gay marriage bill placed before her.

And even the gay community itself tends to be more on the conservative side in the state.

Ishmael

 

[girlsmiley]

gays are tolerated?