- Joined
- Apr 16, 2007
- Messages
- 11,010
- Reaction score
- 5,149
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Other
Coming from someone who thinks all taxes are theft and child support is slavery, that doesn't mean much. You are right about one thing though, it's never been about religious freedom. It's always been about making homosexuals second class citizens and denying them equal access to the public market place.
:shrug: no one is SJWing it up. Nobody has to. The reality is, however, that we have decided we can trample on people's religious freedoms if their exercise of it hurts someone else's feelings....
.... so long as the first person is Christian. We don't do this crap to other minorities, because that's, like, not politically correct, and stuff.
Lol...good luck.I do.
LOL, if your religion forbids transaction, you probably ought not start a business.I don't know anything about that. I'm just saying that religious reasons is just one of many reasons someone might have to not want to be involved in a transaction.
Lol, you are.:shrug: no one is SJWing it up.
Bull****. Go to Egypt and tell the christians there how poor and oppressed you are.The reality is, however, that we have decided we can trample on people's religious freedoms if their exercise of it hurts someone else's feelings....
.... so long as the first person is Christian. We don't do this crap to other minorities, because that's, like, not politically correct, and stuff.
Actually, as you both point out it's not just about religious freedom, but it's also not just about making non-heteros second class citizens, ... as Henrin states clearly, it's about a perceived right to make any group of citizens they don't like second class citizens. If they can get this line of attack, the right to not be "slaves" when they are open for business, to work for homosexuals I have no doubt it will soon extend to Latinos and African Americans and so on.
Lol...good luck.
LOL, if your religion forbids transaction, you probably ought not start a business.
Lol, "slaves", what ridiculous hyperbole. Nobody is forcing anyone to be slaves or indentured servants. It's simply that if someone wants to operate a public business opened to the public, he needs to open to the public. He can't hang a "No Blacks Allowed" sign out front, and selling things to blacks or gays that he sells to whites is not making him a slave, especially as he agreed to sell those products to the public. If you operate a business open to the public you don't get to pick your customers.
You know, I've never seen anyone source this. Can you point to the actual case where they tried to make this argument?
No, this sjw crap is getting old. In Egypt Christian's rights are templed. You sound exactly like a Feminist
As near as I can tell from the link, this isn't about religion at all, but rather drive thru's.NEWMAN v. PIGGIE PARK ENTERPRISES | FindLaw
After he lost, he made sure the restraunt was filled with pro-slavery literature, and a the confederate flag. When his kids took over the business, they removed the racist symbols and literature, and put a more modern theme to the restaurants
As near as I can tell from the link, this isn't about religion at all, but rather drive thru's.
Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
As near as I can tell from the link, this isn't about religion at all, but rather drive thru's.
Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
Okay - but I was looking for the language, where did it say thatThe argument that was actually used in court was it was trampling on his religious freedom for him to serve black customers to dine in.
Okay - but I was looking for the language, where did it say that
Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
Lol, "slaves", what ridiculous hyperbole. Nobody is forcing anyone to be slaves or indentured servants. It's simply that if someone wants to operate a public business opened to the public, he needs to open to the public. He can't hang a "No Blacks Allowed" sign out front, and selling things to blacks or gays that he sells to whites is not making him a slave, especially as he agreed to sell those products to the public. If you operate a business open to the public you don't get to pick your customers.
I agree, and wanted to point out that bs excuse wouldn't stay limited to non-heteros if they are allowed to use that specific excuse as Henrin was touting.
I somewhat agree with the concept of the right to refuse service, within limits like causing someone causing an uproar, insulting personnel, etc., but not based on one's personal preferences or traits. For example, I hate that neon chartruese some people wear, but I certainly would feel it would be wrong to refuse service to someone just because they were wearing that color, hence preference, ... traits are obvious so I'll not elaborate on them.
Lol, what?Yes, Libertarian-right poster that supports forcing people to serve others against their will, I will be sure to do that.
I would agree, so what is worn all the religious caterwalling? They are distracting from the issue. People should be allowed to choose which customers they want to serve. Reasons don't matter. They're mostly stupid.Ifthey don't want to serve certain people, but have no problem serving others that seems like enough reason for them to start a business.
Of course property rights, association rights, and the right to ones labor is not limited to a certain kind of transaction. Btw, I think it's fun how someone that mutilated their son is getting all up roar about someone not consented to trade. lol. Then again, maybe your son keeping his body whole is less important than Cheetos.
My son and to date all of his girlfriends are perfectly happy with his penis. In the end, that's all that matters regarding that issue. And on private property used for personal use/business is exactly as you suggest. Open to the public for business, then gotta be open to all public. Being paid equally for services or products rendered to one group as you are by another group is not anything akin to slavery or indentured servitude.
Your son is ignorant of the truth. Tell me, why do you put some stupid transaction of Cheetos about the rights of your son? You never did answer that.
Cheetos? WTF are you typing about? My decisions about my son's circumcision is an inappropriate distraction in this thread.
Of course property rights, association rights, and the right to ones labor is not limited to a certain kind of transaction. Btw, I think it's fun how someone that mutilated their son is getting all up in an roar about someone not consenting to trade. lol. Then again, maybe your son keeping his body whole is less important than Cheetos.
My son and to date all of his girlfriends are perfectly happy with his penis. In the end, that's all that matters regarding that issue. And on private property used for personal use/business is exactly as you suggest. Open to the public for business, then gotta be open to all public. Being paid equally for services or products rendered to one group as you are by another group is not anything akin to slavery or indentured servitude.
Well look who is being racist and sexist.Very white male Texan of you.
No sir. I don't need special little laws to protect me. I think you mean to say my views on religion are more in line with left wing politics. But that's precisely why partisan hackery is stupid.However, .. your claims are about homosexuality and religion are ore in line with the feminist claims.
That's utter equine excrement. If you just change out the word "religious" with sex or women. It's the exact same argument.cpwills is more in line with the response to the feminists.
Why is it inappropriate? It shows that you have no concept of the principles in play. The right to body sovereignty is the origin of both topics. The right to body integrity and the right to ones own labor and property are ALL born from body sovereignty.
I think it's wildly hilarious that Henrin, potential deadbeat father and the same guy that called child support slavery is giving parenting advice.
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?