Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
And you are allowed to be a racist, but we, society, sets the rules that businesses must follow.The Bill of rights protects your right to be a racist, you stupid baboon. That's what Freedom of Speech and freedom of association are.This is what The Tea Party Religionist are really after...the Right to be blatant racists with impunity with legal protection ....
The business does not attend church, nor is it one. The No ******* church is allowed, the No ******* gas station is not. That is the reality, that you of course reject.
What would happen if a business refused to serve a busload of NFL football players because most of them were black?
Actually, it wasn't the "same thing"
Lying as always, eh shitflinger?
{(a) IN GENERAL- Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b).
(b) EXCEPTION- Government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person--
(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and
(2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.}
Is that Indiana, or the Clinton bill, shitflinger?
quiet, hack. what religion requires that you discriminate against people?
you loons said the same thing when you were opposing desegregation.
They WANT the right to discriminate racially. That's what they mean when they say a business should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.
They are not comfortable living in modern American, to put it another way.
[
no different than any other fundie.
or perhaps you want to explain the difference to dr till's family? or to the parents of the kids killed in the federal building in Oklahoma?
we know what the answer is. pence saying it or not is irrelevant. and they're cowards, so why would they answer?
Pence is on the opposite side of you and your party.
Pence is defending civil liberty and the Bill of Rights, you demagogues are dedicated to eradicating both.
Bringing back racial discrimination is a step forward in civil liberties?
The ironic part of this, most of the florists and bakeries there are soon going to make this look like somebody forget to being enough rainbows:Why should a merchant subject himself to the hostility of a swam of angry queer hornets? The sign you want is merely a target letting assholes like you know who to harass and vandalize. The Nazis did the same exact thing to the Jews.
The latter would be the fun part. Believe me, if you don't bake cakes for fags everyone is about to know it and that is not going to be good for business in the long run. While the Jesusfreaks may flock to buy cupcakes in the beginning, the corporate guys will ask for their orders to come in unmarked boxes and soon after stop calling period. That's what put good old Melissa out of business.The later would be a illegal, moron. Store owners are free to put whatever sign the like in their windows. That is, they are for the moment.I'd like to see two stickers around a lot. The We Don't Discriminate on the store windows, and the This Person Buys From Bigots slapped on the car bumpers of those who do.Having a sign up will hurt their business. People will see that here is a merchant who does not believe in equal rights.Please explain without calling names why having a sign up is such a bad idea. How is that a bad thing?
But by not having a sign warning customers of their policy, the business can go on discriminating without the public blow back.
This what happens to a Christian who caters a gay wedding:
Now do you understand the law ?
Yes they are. Only morons and fascist thugs disagree.THE RABBI SAID:
“It's a violation of their conscience. Isnt that obvious?”
What's obvious is that public accommodations laws are not a 'violation' of anyone's conscience.
Public accommodations laws are regulatory, just and proper measures whose sole intent is to regulate commerce, not 'violate' religious practice. That some might perceive public accommodations laws as 'violating' religious liberty is subjective and incorrect.
Sexual orientation si an immutable trait, not a choice."A member of the H. of Rep. offer a bill to add the LGBT community to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and see how many members from each Caucus sign on as co-sponsors"
Something that should be done but unfortunately won't, given the current makeup of Congress and the unwarranted hostility toward gay Americans coming mostly from the right.Actually, it wasn't the "same thing"
Lying as always, eh shitflinger?
{(a) IN GENERAL- Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b).
(b) EXCEPTION- Government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person--
(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and
(2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.}
Is that Indiana, or the Clinton bill, shitflinger?
quiet, hack. what religion requires that you discriminate against people?
you loons said the same thing when you were opposing desegregation.
Choices regarding one's sexual behavior, are irrelevant to rules, regulations and laws regarding RACE.
Discrimination against people known for their poor choices, is a fundamental NECESSITY OF NATURE.
It's partly political, but it's lovely irony how Indiana and Pence literally tripped over their own dicks on this. The law was in response to Fed Ct rulings that Indiana must allow gay marriage. No bakers were yet sued, but oh those GOP legislators had to be ready .... but for what? So, they tweaked the bill so that it would apply to private actions of one person v another person.They're breaking out the Islamic extremist photos, linking them to Liberalism and claiming they are correct.
What do we know for certain once the Rabid Right leans on its Islamic decapitation meme?
A) They are terribly desperate to make some kind of cogent point, but they fail as usual
B) They know they are losing the argument so tripping down a primrose path is their only recourse.
Ah! Social Conservatives! We can read you like a Bible, which you so rarely read yourselves.
Homosexual sex between consenting adults is legal.
So you're saying then that Homosexual behavior which occurred prior to the dropping of Laws which made it illegal, was wrong? Thus by logical extension, you're saying that it was wrong to remove those laws, providing for the acceptance of behavior which was wrong?
OH! Well... welcome back.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/..._6969454.html?utm_hp_ref=politics&ir=Politicshttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/..._6969454.html?utm_hp_ref=politics&ir=Politics
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/..._6969454.html?utm_hp_ref=politics&ir=Politics
College Presidents Condemn Indiana's New 'Religious Freedom' Law
It's partly political, but it's lovely irony how Indiana and Pence literally tripped over their own dicks on this. The law was in response to Fed Ct rulings that Indiana must allow gay marriage. No bakers were yet sued, but oh those GOP legislators had to be ready .... but for what? So, they tweaked the bill so that it would apply to private actions of one person v another person.They're breaking out the Islamic extremist photos, linking them to Liberalism and claiming they are correct.
What do we know for certain once the Rabid Right leans on its Islamic decapitation meme?
A) They are terribly desperate to make some kind of cogent point, but they fail as usual
B) They know they are losing the argument so tripping down a primrose path is their only recourse.
Ah! Social Conservatives! We can read you like a Bible, which you so rarely read yourselves.
But, but .... Indiana had no law preventing discrimination against gays in the first place. That's right, if you're an employer in the Hoosier state, you can fire the queers! But, but what of the bakers? Surely they should not be forced to bake. But, but Indiana had no private accommodation law, so the gays couldn't make the state fine those bakers.
In fine Hoosier fashion, Indiana passed a law solving imaginary problems, and in doing so proudly announced Indiana is the place to discriminate against gays .... and anybody else whose religious morals one doesn't like!
Forget it Pence, the GOP already has the special ed candidate in Rick Perry.
Why no one understands Indiana s new religious freedom law - The Washington Post
GOP Indianapolis mayor defies Pence, bans discrimination by Christian businesses receiving city funds
At a press conference on Monday, Greg Ballard (R) said that he would issue an executive order that required all businesses to follow the city’s human rights ordinance, the Indianapolis Star reported.
