- Joined
- May 14, 2008
- Messages
- 27,656
- Reaction score
- 12,050
- Location
- Over the edge...
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Well yes, Stalin had followers too.Donations are now closed at a total of $842,387. This gave us a chance to compare conservatism in action as opposed to liberalism in action
Not if they took it upon themselves to provide that labor.So forcing someone to provide someone else their labor is not tyranny?
No one forced anyone to do anything. People take on to serve others when they open a business to the public.Forcing someone to give up their property in trade to another person is not tyranny?
No, you just have no clue how it applies.Well, we have a very different view on tyranny, mister anarchist.
Here is a clue in order to avoid making stupid comparisons. Introducing an illegal activity as a comparison is always a failure.I suppose you also believe that if a restaurant refused to cater a NAMBLA party, they would be intolerant, anti-gay bigots too... Right?
But bigots will support other bigots...Americans don't donate money to bigots, they donate it to people who have been wrongly abused and victimized.
I am curious. Say if you worked for company ABC Inc. as on of their executives and all of a sudden ABC Inc. declared support for gay marriage and gave large donations to make it legal everywhere. Would you quit your job?If I owned a restaurant, I sure as hell wouldn't cater to them...
Lost to those pushing this agenda of persecution and destruction of anyone who doesn't bow down is the fact the owners stated on video they did not discriminate against anyone in the course of doing business. What they did say is their religious beliefs would preclude them from participating in an event that goes against their faith.
Why not demand a Jew cater an event during Passover? How about demanding a Jewish Bakery cater a SSM last night?
There was no bigotry in the statements of the owners. They didn't pass judgment on gays, in fact they said the exact opposite. But that is lost on the pushers of the agenda.
Even your statement about me not liking the fact gays are human points to the BS tripe that pervades the agenda pushers. Where in anything I've ever written have I even inferred gays are not human. But that doesn't stop the storm troops from claiming it.
Pathetic.
Exactly, well said.The true winners in all this: The gays and lesbians in Indiana.
Because of the viscous Indiana law bigots passed last week -- and the abhorrence with which people reacted to it nationwide
now --
for the first time in Indiana history: codified into law now are protections based on sexual orientation!
Pizza pop and kid hit the RW cult lottery and won buckos, but their cause is lost.
Indiana gay and lesbian citizens won by a far wider margin and are the happy recipients of a much richer moral battle.
BS. No law has ever forced anyone to serve anyone else. People take it on themselves to serve others when they open a business that is open to the public
IOW, people are free to agree to anything they want
as long as the libertarian authoritarians approve.
Actually they do not and you should know better. Even by your own admission, "Where the public accommodation is mainly commercial, a duty to serve is most likely to exist" and last I looked a pizza shop does fit that description.There are at least two Supreme Court decisions, Hurley and Dale, that prove your assertions are false.
Donations are now closed at a total of $842,387. This gave us a chance to compare conservatism in action as opposed to liberalism in action
there's no such thing as a libertarian authoritarian.... sorry.
Who knew you could get rich by being a terrible human being?
Oh wait, I guess I knew that one for a really long time already.
tlyBigot:
a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.
:: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)
denying service based on sexuality might indeed be bigotry ( not inherently, but it probably is, nonetheless)... throwing the word "bigot" around.
unfortunately, bigots calling bigots bigots doesn't leave a lot of room for much moral or ethical high ground. <shrug>
I wasn't referring to you personally in that post.. but yes, you're a bigot too.... we all are at one time or another.
The true winners in all this: The gays and lesbians in Indiana.
Because of the viscous Indiana law bigots passed last week -- and the abhorrence with which people reacted to it nationwide
now --
for the first time in Indiana history: codified into law now are protections based on sexual orientation!
Pizza pop and kid hit the RW cult lottery and won buckos, but their cause is lost.
Indiana gay and lesbian citizens won by a far wider margin and are the happy recipients of a much richer moral battle.
The Constitution does indeed protect the exercise of religion while operating a business. Any law to the contrary is unconstitutional
So the owners were scam artist huh?
The American people pulled out their checkbooks and spoke loud and clear about who the victims of intolerance and bigotry were, so save the speech for your next Jon Lovitz impersonation.
What if it rained Hershey Kisses and lollipops grew on trees?
The American people pulled out their checkbooks and spoke loud and clear about who the victims of intolerance and bigotry were... Let me give you a hint: I hear they also make a great calzone.
Indeed they are. Including not being forced to labor for events or goals they do not agree with, yes?
:lamoYet enough of so called Christians have managed to get lawmakers to pass laws that would allow them, the so called Christians, to deny service to gays. Tough love eh?
Has anyone asked you to?
Have you been asked to officiate a gay wedding, be the best man, or hold a candle at the nuptials? So what is it exactly that you do not want to do?
And here you are doing the very thing you accuse gays of doing. Hypocrisy at its finest.
Actually they do not and you should know better. Even by your own admission, "Where the public accommodation is mainly commercial, a duty to serve is most likely to exist" and last I looked a pizza shop does fit that description.
Neither Hurley or Roberts were about commercial enterprises open to public.
Actually they do not and you should know better. Even by your own admission, "Where the public accommodation is mainly commercial, a duty to serve is most likely to exist" and last I looked a pizza shop does fit that description.
Neither Hurley or Roberts were about commercial enterprises open to public.
No. She said she was happy to serve Gay people but would nt serve at a Gay wedding ceremony. And that was only a hypothetical.But I thought her answer to the hypothetical (which has already happened in practice all over) question was that she wouldn't serve gay people, no?
Wow!! It seems you know nothing of either camp!!Without a doubt, the bigoted Christians have much more in common with the Taliban Muslims.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?