Citicorp

Helium

Old Mossy Horns
Thank you.. As for all the arguments to the contrary; those are simply semantics. You either think it is OK to discriminate against a certain demographic of your choice or you think that is wrong. The third option is that you are hypocritical in the matter.

I agree that judges are going to have to stand on one side or the other here.. the fence will be hard to sit.

Definitely truth to the above if we were ONLY dealing with semantics and law. HOWEVER, law of any sort is always a result/byproduct of moral and ethical codes.... which eventually leads back to the main question: "What is right and/or good?" This will lead to a discussion about absolute truth and who decides it. Ultimately it will lead back to God in many forms and fashions BUT is essential and foundational to morality.

Before anyone pulls the whole "yeah but the 10 commandments were pre-dated by the Code of Hammurabi".... AND? That just reiterates my point and supports the Bible as the Bible says "The law of God is written on the hearts of men". So, guess where Hammurabi came up with the code? GOD
 

FITZH2O

Old Mossy Horns
Definitely truth to the above if we were ONLY dealing with semantics and law. HOWEVER, law of any sort is always a result/byproduct of moral and ethical codes.... which eventually leads back to the main question: "What is right and/or good?" This will lead to a discussion about absolute truth and who decides it. Ultimately it will lead back to God in many forms and fashions BUT is essential and foundational to morality.

Before anyone pulls the whole "yeah but the 10 commandments were pre-dated by the Code of Hammurabi".... AND? That just reiterates my point and supports the Bible as the Bible says "The law of God is written on the hearts of men". So, guess where Hammurabi came up with the code? GOD

Gotta love a good catch-all lol
 

Soilman

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
As in the matter of the cake, I would submit that the vendor was NOT discriminating against a demographic, but rather refusing to make a product of offensive nature to them. It is like a wood worker refusing to make a table out of beautiful oak wood, because the customer wants it painted over with white paint. The woodworker isn't discriminating against the customer, but refusing to compromise his principles of painting wood that he believes should only be stained.
Also, in my mind, the law says that you are a legal adult at 18. That means you have attained the age of responsibility for all RIGHTS as well as any punishments and penalties. To refuse someone a RIGHT at legal age of adulthood IS discrimination.
 

woodmoose

Administrator
Staff member
Contributor
Also, in my mind, the law says that you are a legal adult at 18. That means you have attained the age of responsibility for all RIGHTS as well as any punishments and penalties. To refuse someone a RIGHT at legal age of adulthood IS discrimination.

Already do it for handguns and alcohol - just another step to Big Brother
 

ScottyB

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
So is it possible that Citicorp is making a business decision here that they feel will gain them more customers than it will lose? Are they playing on the heat of the political climate with hopes of big returns? It cannot be just “the right thing to do”.......not in a company that size ........can it? There has to be a marked financial gain in sight.... right?
 

Ldsoldier

Old Mossy Horns
Hopefully the affected vendors will seek out new hosts for their credit cards and millions, if not billions of dollars that run through them. Hope this bites Citicorp in the rearend hard.
 

pinehunter

Eight Pointer
Funny you mention that. I've been thinking about the same thing over the past few days and have been conflicted.

In the case of the wedding cake and the merchant, I felt it was the merchants right to decide not to sell to a certain demographic. Now merchants are choosing to not sell guns and gun related items to a certain demographic (under 21 for example).
If I agreed it was ok for the baker to "choose his customers", isn't it hypocritical of me say Walmart, Citicorp, Dicks, YouTube, etc. cant choose to not do business with a particular demographic?

I'm not arguing the legality of various opinions of what's discrimination and what's not. I'm just saying I cant have it both ways.

The difference us the right to have a cake baked for you isn't guaranteed by the US constitution. The right to own a fire arm is.
 

Firedog

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
The difference us the right to have a cake baked for you isn't guaranteed by the US constitution. The right to own a fire arm is.

Please show me where this action by citi is denying anyone the right to own a firearm...

Listen I don't agree with what they are doing but tryin to say the are denying g you a right sems a bit over the top.
 

Newsome Road

Ten Pointer
Please show me where this action by citi is denying anyone the right to own a firearm...

Listen I don't agree with what they are doing but tryin to say the are denying g you a right sems a bit over the top.

Agreed. The government shouldn't be telling businesses what they can and can't do when no laws are being broken. That's what the market is for. If citi doesn't want their money being spent on guns, that's fine with me. It's up to us as gun owners to force them to change their stance by running their bottom line into the red. It's not up the government to say they don't have a right to refuse service.

If I decide as a taxidermist that I don't want to put coyote teeth in a deer mount, because I don't care for novelty taxidermy, I don't want the government coming in and telling me I have to. It's up to the customer to find another taxidermist that will. If my decision upsets enough people, either I will have to change my stance, or I will go out of business.
 

chef

Ten Pointer
Agreed. The government shouldn't be telling businesses what they can and can't do when no laws are being broken. That's what the market is for. If citi doesn't want their money being spent on guns, that's fine with me. It's up to us as gun owners to force them to change their stance by running their bottom line into the red. It's not up the government to say they don't have a right to refuse service.

If I decide as a taxidermist that I don't want to put coyote teeth in a deer mount, because I don't care for novelty taxidermy, I don't want the government coming in and telling me I have to. It's up to the customer to find another taxidermist that will. If my decision upsets enough people, either I will have to change my stance, or I will go out of business.

Sorry, the commerce clause disagrees with you. The same one that was used to end whites only diners.
 

JONOV

Old Mossy Horns
Cakes?? Really..... Cakes aren't mentioned in the Constitution, my right to bear arms is......

You have a constitutional right to film pornography too. But banks aren’t required to finance your porn studio even if they finance film studios for other stuff.

And a store has the right to stock and sell or not to stock and sell anything they want.

The question is, is refusing to sell a cake akin to not serving customers of an ethnicity or if it’s akin to not stocking porn in the magazine rack.
 
Last edited:

pinehunter

Eight Pointer
Please show me where this action by citi is denying anyone the right to own a firearm...

Listen I don't agree with what they are doing but tryin to say the are denying g you a right sems a bit over the top.


You may be right, it may not be a denial of rights unless all banks did this.

There is a fair amount of recent legal precedent that this is discrimination. I can be drafted, vote, drive, legally be an adult and not buy a single shot .22 rifle with my Citicorp card because they think I'm too young? Give me a break.

I was carrying a pistol, as a 19 year old Marine, after numerous backround checks and receiving a nice clearance but could not legally buy the same gun I was carrying. This was at a secure installation north of DC where we pulled presidential guard duty for Bill and Hillary.

MY point?

You might be OK with the .gov and banks eroding our rights with our best interest at heart, but I feel as gun owners in this country we have already given in way too much. We have to let them know this IS a wrong and it IS at the very least discriminatory and could turn in to a denial if rights if we just roll over and accept this.
 

Firedog

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
Sorry, the commerce clause disagrees with you. The same one that was used to end whites only diners.

The difference in the two are protected classes.. gun ownership is not a protected class. You can not discriminate against a protected class you can against anyone else, so long as you are consistent.

You may be right, it may not be a denial of rights unless all banks did this.

Even if every bank did this they would still not be denying anyone a right. They are simply making it more difficult to exercise that right.. the only way you could get to this action being a denial of rights is for the US to no longer have physical paper money and then every bank do this.. at that point you have no other options to purchase..
 
Last edited:

pinehunter

Eight Pointer
The banks would not be "colluding" against gun owners to hinder their access to constitutional rights? The legal system is not as cut and dry as you are making it sound. There are lawyered up bad judgements made every day. I am sure a competent legal team could make quite a case.
 

Firedog

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
I am not talking about the legal system.. I am talking about the reality of denial of rights by a private company. Could you find the right judge to rule in either direction..most likely. Btw you have to prove collusion which is not so easy to do either.
 

pinehunter

Eight Pointer
The reality here is the legal system will determine our denial of rights. Banks control our money, other than religion I can't think of a more powerful non government entity. The reality is that banks can certainly deny rights if they go unchecked by our legal system.

Letting some financial institution exert is political will unchecked is a bad idea IMHO.
 
Top