Are Boycotting Entities Outside North Carolina Etc. Practicing Sedition of Sovereign Democracy?

[Silhouette]

"First, there is this that companies pressuring all 50 states to conform to the LGBT cult..."

And it was at this point the thread failed.

They are. Those same companies would boycott with 100% terms of surrender (force by blackmail or tyranny) ANY of the 50 states. It is up to the states to fight back. Kudos to NC. People respect leaders who do what they voted them into office to do and to stand by principles the voters elected them to stand by.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

What he said is absolutely correct. If anyone is trolling it's you with your constant anti-gay threads. This is like, what, the 100th one since last summer's ruling? It's here to stay. You lost. Get over it.

I don't bow to tyranny or sedition. Get over it.

You mean representative republic, right?

Why do you hate Capitalism, by the way?

 

[Skylar]

It was correct the first time.

Obviously not. As you have yet to describe either tyranny or sedition.

You've done a lovely demonstration of hysteric overreaction though.

 

[Skylar]

"First, there is this that companies pressuring all 50 states to conform to the LGBT cult..."

And it was at this point the thread failed.

They are. Those same companies would boycott with 100% terms of surrender (force by blackmail or tyranny) ANY of the 50 states. It is up to the states to fight back. Kudos to NC. People respect leaders who do what they voted them into office to do and to stand by principles the voters elected them to stand by.

Nope. Not one state recognizes the nonsense you've made up as 'sedition', 'tyranny', or any of the bizarre labels you've applied. You're literally making this nonsense up as you go along.......and it doesn't have the slightest relevance to any law or any person mentioned.

Remember, Sil....and this point is fundamental: you have no idea how our laws work. It tends to limit the utility of your 'legal' arguments.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What he said is absolutely correct. If anyone is trolling it's you with your constant anti-gay threads. This is like, what, the 100th one since last summer's ruling? It's here to stay. You lost. Get over it.

I don't bow to tyranny or sedition. Get over it.

You have no idea what either mean.

 

[hadit]

Let's see if we get this straight. It's wonderful that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint, but it's terrible that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint?

 

[Silhouette]

Let's see if we get this straight. It's wonderful that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint, but it's terrible that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint?

The difference is, the Kleins of Oregon aren't forcing the gays who wanted them to make a wedding cake to convert to Christianity, "or else we're intending on using some flaw in your lives to defame you and utterly destroy you with the singular purpose of forcing you to your knees to cleave to our demands.".

See the difference? I know you do..

And it becomes a horse of a completely different color when that duress is intended to usurp lawful democracy rule in a sovereign STATE instead of random citizens here and there. We're taking about actions aimed at, tailored for and designed to withdraw the power of millions of voters by using blackmail against their preferred and elected leaders and the types of institutions those voters knew they stood for when they cast their votes.

BIG difference there muchacho..

 

[Skylar]

Let's see if we get this straight. It's wonderful that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint, but it's terrible that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint?

The difference is, the Kleins of Oregon aren't forcing the gays who wanted them to make a wedding cake to convert to Christianity, "or else we're intending on using some flaw in your lives to defame you and utterly destroy you with the singular purpose of forcing you to your knees to cleave to our demands.".

That's not sedition. That's a public accommodation law that forbids discrimination by pubic business based on sexual orientation.

See the difference?

Of course you don't. As you have no idea how are law works.

 

[IsaacNewton]

First of you can't use a thread here as a 'poll', unless you state it's a poll from here. 100 people? Polls are generally of thousand or tens of thousands of people in a good cross section. A political message board doesn't offer a generalized cross section.

And for a state it's simple, get to lawyering if you think you have a case against a company who is saying 'your obsolete laws are harming our profitability in your state so we're leaving if they don't change'. Conservatives seem overjoyed when anyone says they are leaving California for whatever reason. Stop the whining, the society has moved on and has changed. If one small group of people in the society can't accept that change then they, by natural selection, get marginalized until they do change.

A state gets to force companies to accept their abhorrent policies? In the words of Dana Carbey, "not gonna do it".

 

[Skylar]

First of you can't use a thread here as a 'poll', unless you state it's a poll from here. 100 people? Polls are generally of thousand or tens of thousands of people in a good cross section. A political message board doesn't off a generalized cross section.

Its also a straw poll. Which means that only interested parties vote. If strawpolls had any accuracy, Ron Paul would be president for three terms.

Second, you can vote as many times as you'd like in the USMB strawpoll. Making it even more useless.

Third, the polling sample was uselessly small for a national poll.

Fourth, it doesn't mention anything that Sil attributes to it. Marriage is never so much as mentioned.

 

[jillian]

First, there is this that companies pressuring all 50 states to conform to the LGBT cult should consider....the real actual numbers of support vs the media-owned LGBT dispensed bullshit smoke and mirrors:

*snip*

your thread question is insane.

and the answer is no.

 

[hadit]

Let's see if we get this straight. It's wonderful that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint, but it's terrible that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint?

The difference is, the Kleins of Oregon aren't forcing the gays who wanted them to make a wedding cake to convert to Christianity, "or else we're intending on using some flaw in your lives to defame you and utterly destroy you with the singular purpose of forcing you to your knees to cleave to our demands.".

See the difference? I know you do..

And it becomes a horse of a completely different color when that duress is intended to usurp lawful democracy rule in a sovereign STATE instead of random citizens here and there. We're taking about actions aimed at, tailored for and designed to withdraw the power of millions of voters by using blackmail against their preferred and elected leaders and the types of institutions those voters knew they stood for when they cast their votes.

BIG difference there muchacho..

It seems hypocritical for companies to exercise their freedom to refuse to do business with a state because that state refuses to force companies to do business with people with whom they disagree.

 

[Silhouette]

Let's see if we get this straight. It's wonderful that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint, but it's terrible that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint?

The difference is, the Kleins of Oregon aren't forcing the gays who wanted them to make a wedding cake to convert to Christianity, "or else we're intending on using some flaw in your lives to defame you and utterly destroy you with the singular purpose of forcing you to your knees to cleave to our demands.".

See the difference? I know you do..

And it becomes a horse of a completely different color when that duress is intended to usurp lawful democracy rule in a sovereign STATE instead of random citizens here and there. We're taking about actions aimed at, tailored for and designed to withdraw the power of millions of voters by using blackmail against their preferred and elected leaders and the types of institutions those voters knew they stood for when they cast their votes.

BIG difference there muchacho..

It seems hypocritical for companies to exercise their freedom to refuse to do business with a state because that state refuses to force companies to do business with people with whom they disagree.

Sedition is different. It's using language or acts geared specifically to undermine the stability or in our case the self-determination of our governance with an ulterior motive in mind. In this case, the perps aren't even being shy about it. They are saying to North Carolina "we don't like how your majority is ruling so we are going to punish them in real tangible ways". If I were a business, I'd stay clear the hell out of that.

It's one thing to grab the attention of people to start talks. It's another to issue unwavering mandates via blackmail.

 

[Skylar]

Let's see if we get this straight. It's wonderful that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint, but it's terrible that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint?

The difference is, the Kleins of Oregon aren't forcing the gays who wanted them to make a wedding cake to convert to Christianity, "or else we're intending on using some flaw in your lives to defame you and utterly destroy you with the singular purpose of forcing you to your knees to cleave to our demands.".

See the difference? I know you do..

That's not sedition. That's a public accommodation law that forbids discrimination by pubic business based on sexual orientation.

See the difference?

Of course you don't. As you have no idea how are law works.

Sedition is different. It's using language or acts geared specifically to undermine the stability or in our case the self-determination of our governance with an ulterior motive in mind.

Nope. Your definition of sedition is made up gibberish. As is your made up 'ulterior motives'. You're literally just making this shit up as you go along, with no court or law recognizing any of your nonsense.

What's the use of a 'legal' argument that isn't recognized by the law or the courts? Self soothing, apparently.

In this case, the perps aren't even being shy about it. They are saying to North Carolina "we don't like how your majority is ruling so we are going to punish them in real tangible ways". If I were a business, I'd stay clear the hell out of that.

It's one thing to grab the attention of people to start talks. It's another to issue unwavering mandates via blackmail.

Then it will be remarkably easy for you to show us one court recognizing a business boycott as an act of sedition.

You can't.....as you made up yet another in an endless series of pseudo-legal ramblings.

 

[mdk]

Rosa Parks is a seditious ***** for forcing social change via the Montgomery Bus Boycott!

 

[Skylar]

First, there is this that companies pressuring all 50 states to conform to the LGBT cult should consider....the real actual numbers of support vs the media-owned LGBT dispensed bullshit smoke and mirrors:

*snip*

your thread question is insane.

and the answer is no.

Yup. With 68 other threads on the same general topic, her own website where she's trying to solicit donations to 'fight the LGBT cult', and her own message board where she 29 active threads where she talks only to herself....

........insane was pretty much a foregone conclusion.

 

[Syriusly]

Let's see if we get this straight. It's wonderful that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint, but it's terrible that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint?

The difference is, the Kleins of Oregon aren't forcing the gays who wanted them to make a wedding cake to convert to Christianity, .

Nor is anyone forcing the Kleins to convert from Christianity.

The Kleins are expected to follow the exact same business law that every Oregonian- including every gay Oregonian- is expected to follow.

If they aren't willing to follow the law- as the New Testament tells them to- then they shouldn't have a business.

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

They're practicing mass stupidity. The circus cancels shows in S.C. and has a show booked in Dubai.

Men can't puss in a women's restroom, in S.C. Gays are executed in Dubai.

Makes sense, huh?

 

[guno]

"First, there is this that companies pressuring all 50 states to conform to the LGBT cult..."

And it was at this point the thread failed.

They are. Those same companies would boycott with 100% terms of surrender (force by blackmail or tyranny) ANY of the 50 states. It is up to the states to fight back. Kudos to NC. People respect leaders who do what they voted them into office to do and to stand by principles the voters elected them to stand by.

You are a moron, you don't even know what was is in the bill that was signed or why it was hastily drawn up

The "bathroom" portion of this bill is a sideshow, redirecting everyone's attention from Article 2 of the bill, which establishes that no county or city government can raise its minimum wage above the state's level. it also establishes that no county or local government may use their own wage/worker compensation (or other) requirements, or regulations that are above and beyond State-level requirement when negotiating or bidding out for companies to contract work with. this means they wouldn't be able to deny a company the opportunity to win a city contract if the company did not meet minimum city-level wage or worker safety (or other) regulations if the state doesn't also require that level of regulation.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Let's see if we get this straight. It's wonderful that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint, but it's terrible that companies have the freedom to refuse to do business with a group of people who hold a different political viewpoint?

The difference is, the Kleins of Oregon aren't forcing the gays who wanted them to make a wedding cake to convert to Christianity, "or else we're intending on using some flaw in your lives to defame you and utterly destroy you with the singular purpose of forcing you to your knees to cleave to our demands.".

See the difference? I know you do..

And it becomes a horse of a completely different color when that duress is intended to usurp lawful democracy rule in a sovereign STATE instead of random citizens here and there. We're taking about actions aimed at, tailored for and designed to withdraw the power of millions of voters by using blackmail against their preferred and elected leaders and the types of institutions those voters knew they stood for when they cast their votes.

BIG difference there muchacho..

It seems hypocritical for companies to exercise their freedom to refuse to do business with a state because that state refuses to force companies to do business with people with whom they disagree.

Wrong.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy, and is fundamentally ignorant.

Public accommodations laws with provisions for sexual orientation are necessary, proper, and Constitutional, as authorized by the Commerce Clause.

Public accommodations laws are regulatory measures no different than minimum wage laws, laws protecting the health and safety of employees, and those safeguarding the well-being of consumers, and just as Constitutional.

Consequently, there’s no ‘hypocrisy.’