Couple left angered after being told wedding venue not for same-sex marriages

EADC

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2018
Messages
5,340
We are just taking your own arguments and using it against you to show you exactly how ridiculous you are

Either admit that or admit your hypocrisy. There is no other way
What argument? that its against the bill of rights to discriminate? that's just a fact.
 

EADC

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2018
Messages
5,340
Not really. I made the more absurd situation and still haven't received an answer for a very simple question.

Claiming that the right of admission law needs to be this strict yet denying "gym bros" is really only catering for your own personal bias.

It's a hypocritical joke.
Some one finally got it.
 

daveza

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
38,454
Probably the clearest explanation I have read -


These are examples of indirect discrimination and once you have shown that you have been treated differently from others it will be assumed it is based on your race, sexual orientation or other prohibited ground. The owners will then bear the onus of proving that they did not exclude you because you are black or gay. This will be rather difficult to do. This means that owners of private establishments should think twice before invoking their now severely truncated “right of admission reserved”. It also means that those refused entry or service on spurious grounds will often have a strong legal case of discrimination against the owners of a business.
Don't shoot the messenger - I didn't make the law.
 

EADC

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2018
Messages
5,340
Probably the clearest explanation I have read -




Don't shoot the messenger - I didn't make the law.

No amounts of will help those that just want to argue absurd hypotheticals
 

Asgard85

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2016
Messages
416
The owner/s of the venue have the constitutional right to do business with whom they want.
The les'ies have the exact same constitutional right.
What's the problem.
The owner/s of the venue are not denying a service to the les'ies because they are les'ies, they are denying a service they don't provide - the denied service being same sex marriages.
I am not sure that the owners in fact do have an absolute constitutional right to select with whom they do business. If they do have any such right I imagine it would likely be limited once again by section 9(4) of the constitution. If there are some judgements in this respect that you are aware of that contradict my limited understanding I would be quite interested to read them.

To the matter of whether they are denying a service which they do not provide, which is a sound argument when considered against for example a halaal restaurant, I am interested to see where this argument could lead in the courts. I suppose the details of the case would be important here - did the couple request that the venue provide a chapel and Christian minister to marry them at the altar, or did they simply request a venue to hold their reception? There is certainly a distinction to be made there, I think.

I would also be interested to see if the the provision that marriage officers in the service of the state being allowed to opt-out of performing same-sex marriages at home affairs being declared unconstitutional would have any bearing on this, particularly if the request to the venue was simply for the venue only. Based on the change in RSA which no longer allows marriage officers to deny performing same sex marriages based on personal belief it would seem that the constitution does not provide for religious conscience exemption in complying with the equality clauses in our constitution which is essentially what the owners of Beloftebos would like to stand on. Would be understood to only apply to the state and those in the service of the state, or does it extend to private business as well?

This may well prove to be a test to some of the ideals contained in our supreme law.
 

daveza

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
38,454
Yup really, 585 posts of debate when there's really no argument.

A private business may not discriminate on race, sexual orientation etc when offering their product or services.

Dont like it, campaign to change the Constitution.
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
23,365
Probably the clearest explanation I have read -




Don't shoot the messenger - I didn't make the law.
Which is all well and good, except that doesn't apply to white students going to university or white people applying for jobs. So all of that stuff about discrimination being wrong under the law is nonsense as it doesn't apply to everyone.

Also, deferring your moral judgement to the legal system is a slippery slope (Slavery was legal, therefore it was moral). Rather make it on your own principles.
 

Sollie

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
6,619
When did mob justice come into it?
:sneaky:
Bad publicity will also follow

he has “started a social media campaign and reached out to various journalists to publish [our] homophobia


Since then, we have indeed suffered a vicious public attack on the Beloftebos Facebook page and other social media, replete with threatening, offensive and hateful comments.
 

daveza

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
38,454
Which is all well and good, except that doesn't apply to white students going to university or white people applying for jobs. So all of that stuff about discrimination being wrong under the law is nonsense as it doesn't apply to everyone.
On that point I agree 100% - it's just apartheid social engineering in different packaging.

But the Constitution specifically allows deviation from the discrimination laws when it comes to 'the previously disadvantaged '.

So again, campaign to change the Constitution.

We only need about 20 million votes.
 

Moosedrool

Executive Member
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
5,539
Yup really, 585 posts of debate when there's really no argument.

A private business may not discriminate on race, sexual orientation etc when offering their product or services.

Dont like it, campaign to change the Constitution.
Is this your moral judgement or citing legality?
 

daveza

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
38,454
replete with threatening, offensive and hateful comments.
The kind of comments aimed at gays on a daily basis, particularly on Sundays.
 

Ponderer

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
3,471
I am not sure that the owners in fact do have an absolute constitutional right to select with whom they do business. If they do have any such right I imagine it would likely be limited once again by section 9(4) of the constitution. If there are some judgements in this respect that you are aware of that contradict my limited understanding I would be quite interested to read them.

To the matter of whether they are denying a service which they do not provide, which is a sound argument when considered against for example a halaal restaurant, I am interested to see where this argument could lead in the courts. I suppose the details of the case would be important here - did the couple request that the venue provide a chapel and Christian minister to marry them at the altar, or did they simply request a venue to hold their reception? There is certainly a distinction to be made there, I think.

I would also be interested to see if the the provision that marriage officers in the service of the state being allowed to opt-out of performing same-sex marriages at home affairs being declared unconstitutional would have any bearing on this, particularly if the request to the venue was simply for the venue only. Based on the change in RSA which no longer allows marriage officers to deny performing same sex marriages based on personal belief it would seem that the constitution does not provide for religious conscience exemption in complying with the equality clauses in our constitution which is essentially what the owners of Beloftebos would like to stand on. Would be understood to only apply to the state and those in the service of the state, or does it extend to private business as well?

This may well prove to be a test to some of the ideals contained in our supreme law.
The whole "equal human rights" thing is a farce.
 

2012

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2012
Messages
8,825
Yup really, 585 posts of debate when there's really no argument.

A private business may not discriminate on race, sexual orientation etc when offering their product or services.

Dont like it, campaign to change the Constitution.
Or just read the bill of rights and think long and hard about section 36.

Limitations do exist. How else would restriction on the sale of alcohol and cigarettes to minors be lawful?
 

Unhappy438

Honorary Master
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
19,764
It's a fictional situation. Pointing out its legality is fighting a straw man and since there are countries where adult services are legal I'm wondering why you fought fought the straw man in the first place instead of answering the question. The question boils down to your moral position on the subject of being forced by your employer to do something against your sexuality.
I did answer the question, you probably just didnt understand it. If prostitution was legal and regulated, i doubt they would be allowed to discriminate based on the usual factors. The facilities would probably need to cater for people regardless of race or gender. However since it isn't legal im merely speculating and i don't see the point in that.
 

Asgard85

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2016
Messages
416
The whole "equal human rights" thing is a farce.
Sorry, but I'm not particularly interested in debating the merits of the objectives set out in our constitution. Whether we agree with them or not we currently live under a set of laws governed by it. It has been pointed out in this discussion by others that if one feels sufficiently aggrieved by the constitution then the best action would be to campaign to change it.

I have not passed any moral judgement and have rather kept my discussion to the practical application of the laws as they currently stand as this is what I am interested in. I am keen to follow the case should it be taken to the equality court in order to understand the concepts such as whether "The owner/s of the venue have the constitutional right to do business with whom they want " or not.

If you want to discuss whether or not the idea of equality is a farce I suggest you direct the discussion elsewhere.
 

ponder

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
79,401
I did answer the question, you probably just didnt understand it. If prostitution was legal and regulated, i doubt they would be allowed to discriminate based on the usual factors. The facilities would probably need to cater for people regardless of race or gender. However since it isn't legal im merely speculating and i don't see the point in that.
Prostitution is legal in many first world countries that don't tolerate discrimination, I cannot imagine a single one of them forcing a prostitute to have sex with someone they don't want to. The second you start forcing someone to have sex with another it becomes a crime. If a prostitute says no and you force it then it becomes rape.
 

Unhappy438

Honorary Master
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
19,764
“Wrong think” is the word I like to use when describing it because it emphasises on how authoritarian these ideas can get. And the sjw crazies are perfectly fine with criminalising it.
Load of nonsense, nobody is telling these people how to think. If they want to think that gays are immoral and should burn in hell then they are free to do so. They are not free to act out on those thoughts however.

Policing actions is not policing thoughts.
 

Unhappy438

Honorary Master
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
19,764
Prostitution is legal in many first world countries that don't tolerate discrimination, I cannot imagine a single one of them forcing a prostitute to have sex with someone they don't want to. The second you start forcing someone to have sex with another it becomes a crime. If a prostitute says no and you force it then it becomes rape.
Not talking about individual prostitutes, im talking about whore houses. Its not difficult to staff a business that caters for everyone.

Anyway its another fraught comparison, serving someone a beer is not like having sex with them. You don't get to say im not giving this black guy a beer because a prostitute wouldn't fsk him.
 
Top