Bigoted Florist Loses Again

[Synthaholic]

In business? Then serve everyone equally.

You mean like letting the President have an account on Twitter and Facebookburning?

I don't think the SCOTUS decision affects people who go into florist shops and piss on the floor, curse at the florist, and smash merchandise.

Trump did NONE of that. You must be off your meds, Biden Loon

Trump violated the rules of the house. So they kicked him out of the house.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

It’s a settled, accepted fact of law that religious beliefs don’t justify ignoring or violating just and proper laws, such as public accommodations laws.

Moreover, the enforcement of just and proper laws in no manner restricts or violates religious liberty or expression.

Wrong. What does this say?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

No law means no law.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Why would people want to hire someone that does not want to work for them unless they are ust looking for a lawsuit.

Was there a sign on the door saying "We don't serve gay people" so the couple would know ahead of time. Maybe there should be.

Not if public accommodations laws prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

No law overrides the Constitution without a ratified amendment providing authority to do so.

 

[Dusty]

Why would people want to hire someone that does not want to work for them unless they are ust looking for a lawsuit.

Was there a sign on the door saying "We don't serve gay people" so the couple would know ahead of time. Maybe there should be.

Not if public accommodations laws prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

No law overrides the Constitution without a ratified amendment providing authority to do so.

The constitution is literally a figment of the collective imagination of fools. If not I would have my own nuclear tipped drones

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

No binding precedent was set by the decision. It will be revisited and soon, I'll wager.

One can only hope.


I have no faith in the so-called 'supreme' Court.

If push comes to shove, there is no entity with supremacy over the American people.

 

[Dusty]

No binding precedent was set by the decision. It will be revisited and soon, I'll wager.

One can only hope.


I have no faith in the so-called 'supreme' Court.

If push comes to shove, there is no entity with supremacy over the American people.

Sure there is, the american government. The American people recently protested and now are going to jail

 

[PoliticalChic]

No binding precedent was set by the decision. It will be revisited and soon, I'll wager.

One can only hope.


I have no faith in the so-called 'supreme' Court.

If push comes to shove, there is no entity with supremacy over the American people.

It depends on which 'American people,'....

...and whether there is the will to exercise their unalienable rights.


Looking at what the people put up with in the run-up to the theft of the election, one wonders who these American people are.

 

[PoliticalChic]

This idea that anyone can violate a law based on a religious belief that they hold is absurd. It is a recipe for chaos. Nobody knows how many religious beliefs exist among the world's religions. In Christianity alone, there is a huge variety of beliefs and Christian groups often contradict each other, so just declaring that one is a Christian does nothing to indicate what belief is at issue.

Public accommodation laws are intended to protect the public. Despite the idiotic contention that a rejected customer has some obligation to leave and remain silent, there is no such obligation, and there is no way a prospective customer would even know what a vendor's beliefs are in the first place. The consumer has to be protected, too.

"This idea that anyone can violate a law based on a religious belief that they hold is absurd."

One cannot imagine an educated person saying that, with knowledge of the deeply religious folks who founded this country.

They'd be deeply ashamed of you.

But....if you vote Democrat, you have no same.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

No binding precedent was set by the decision. It will be revisited and soon, I'll wager.

One can only hope.


I have no faith in the so-called 'supreme' Court.

If push comes to shove, there is no entity with supremacy over the American people.

Sure there is, the american government. The American people recently protested and now are going to jail

The American people are the government. They elect administrators, not rulers.

When those elected administrators step far enough outside the authority the Constitution grants them, there will be business.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

No binding precedent was set by the decision. It will be revisited and soon, I'll wager.

One can only hope.


I have no faith in the so-called 'supreme' Court.

If push comes to shove, there is no entity with supremacy over the American people.

It depends on which 'American people,'....

...and whether there is the will to exercise their unalienable rights.


Looking at what the people put up with in the run-up to the theft of the election, one wonders who these American people are.

Most people want to be left alone to live their lives unimpeded, and Americans are historically slow to anger. They're not looking for revolution.

Our current federal government is a kakistocracy, as is that of many states. We are being administered by the least competent.

All things have a breaking point. Time will tell.

 

[Lastamender]

In business? Then serve everyone equally.

Tell that to Big Tech.

 

[Calypso Jones]

Only the left can deny providing business services with those they oppose.

 

[Lysistrata]

This idea that anyone can violate a law based on a religious belief that they hold is absurd. It is a recipe for chaos. Nobody knows how many religious beliefs exist among the world's religions. In Christianity alone, there is a huge variety of beliefs and Christian groups often contradict each other, so just declaring that one is a Christian does nothing to indicate what belief is at issue.

Public accommodation laws are intended to protect the public. Despite the idiotic contention that a rejected customer has some obligation to leave and remain silent, there is no such obligation, and there is no way a prospective customer would even know what a vendor's beliefs are in the first place. The consumer has to be protected, too.

"This idea that anyone can violate a law based on a religious belief that they hold is absurd."

One cannot imagine an educated person saying that, with knowledge of the deeply religious folks who founded this country.

They'd be deeply ashamed of you.

But....if you vote Democrat, you have no same.

What political party a person votes for is irrelevant.

The "deeply religious folks" you mentioned never agreed among themselves about anything. What went on between them involved whipping, banishment, and hanging.

Look up Roger Williams, Ann Hutchinson, both Puritans, and Mary Dyer and the three other Quakers who were hanged on Boston Common for the crime of being Quaker. A lot of fun was had by all. One of my high school teachers was descended from one of the judges who presided over the Salem Witch Trials, and one of my classmates was a descendent of one of the people they hanged. so there was some hilarity.

Washington attended Christ Episcopal in Alexandria, VA (a friend of mine and I onced prayed at every headstone in the churchyard, and we both admitted to having accidentally prayed over the water connection). Jefferson was a Deist. Of course, Protestants and Catholics celebrated religious freedom in the 19th Century by rioting against each other.

And this was all between Christians. I believe that Jewish people started arriving in the 18th Century, and that the first synogogue was built in Truro, RI, although there might have been one earlier in NYC. By the present day, more religous people from a plethora of religons have become Americans.

This all does not include the beliefs of Native People, who were here before the Europeans.

I'm not sure which, if any of them, would be ashamed of me.

 

[PoliticalChic]

This idea that anyone can violate a law based on a religious belief that they hold is absurd. It is a recipe for chaos. Nobody knows how many religious beliefs exist among the world's religions. In Christianity alone, there is a huge variety of beliefs and Christian groups often contradict each other, so just declaring that one is a Christian does nothing to indicate what belief is at issue.

Public accommodation laws are intended to protect the public. Despite the idiotic contention that a rejected customer has some obligation to leave and remain silent, there is no such obligation, and there is no way a prospective customer would even know what a vendor's beliefs are in the first place. The consumer has to be protected, too.

"This idea that anyone can violate a law based on a religious belief that they hold is absurd."

One cannot imagine an educated person saying that, with knowledge of the deeply religious folks who founded this country.

They'd be deeply ashamed of you.

But....if you vote Democrat, you have no same.

What political party a person votes for is irrelevant.

The "deeply religious folks" you mentioned never agreed among themselves about anything. What went on between them involved whipping, banishment, and hanging.

Look up Roger Williams, Ann Hutchinson, both Puritans, and Mary Dyer and the three other Quakers who were hanged on Boston Common for the crime of being Quaker. A lot of fun was had by all. One of my high school teachers was descended from one of the judges who presided over the Salem Witch Trials, and one of my classmates was a descendent of one of the people they hanged. so there was some hilarity.

Washington attended Christ Episcopal in Alexandria, VA (a friend of mine and I onced prayed at every headstone in the churchyard, and we both admitted to having accidentally prayed over the water connection). Jefferson was a Deist. Of course, Protestants and Catholics celebrated religious freedom in the 19th Century by rioting against each other.

And this was all between Christians. I believe that Jewish people started arriving in the 18th Century, and that the first synogogue was built in Truro, RI, although there might have been one earlier in NYC. By the present day, more religous people from a plethora of religons have become Americans.

This all does not include the beliefs of Native People, who were here before the Europeans.

I'm not sure which, if any of them, would be ashamed of me.

1. "What political party a person votes for is irrelevant.

In the great panorama of stupid pronouncements......your have vaulted to the very top.



2. "The "deeply religious folks" you mentioned never agreed among themselves about anything."

Wait!!! Now you've garnered second place along with first!!!
The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian. “52 of the 56 signers of the declaration and 50 to 52 of the 55 signers of the Constitution were orthodox Trinitarian Christians.” http://www.davidlimbaugh.com/mt/archives/2010/02/new_column_libe_4.html

Believers in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or, as they would be known by Democrats today, “an extremist Fundementalist hate group.”



3. " Look up Roger Williams, Ann Hutchinson, both Puritans, and Mary Dyer and the three other Quakers who were hanged on Boston Common for the crime of being Quaker. A lot of fun was had by all. One of my high school teachers was descended from one of the judges who presided over the Salem Witch Trials, and one of my classmates was a descendent of one of the people they hanged. so there was some hilarity.

Washington attended Christ Episcopal in Alexandria, VA (a friend of mine and I onced prayed at every headstone in the churchyard, and we both admitted to having accidentally prayed over the water connection). Jefferson was a Deist. Of course, Protestants and Catholics celebrated religious freedom in the 19th Century by rioting against each other."


Today's Democrat Party is as far from the earlier versions as can be:
Here is Tom Perez, who served as the Chair of the Democratic National Committee, calling you a liar.

"MARXISTS AND EXTREME RADICALS SEEK TO TAKE OVER THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY
DNC chairman Tom Perez said Democratic Socialists of America member Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez “represents the future of our party.”

DSA chapter chairs have agreed that “communism is good.”

One DSA caucus calls its members “revolutionary Marxists.”

A far-left group behind rising Democratic star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is rife with Marxists and other far-left radicals.
The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which includes Ocasio-Cortez, is creeping its way into the mainstream of American politics.

What Perez didn’t mention is that the group behind “the future” of the Democratic Party is teeming with radicals openly dedicated to dismantling and overturning the economic and social foundations of the United States."
Marxists And Extreme Radicals Seek To Take Over The Democratic Party

Marxists And Extreme Radicals Seek To Take Over The Democratic Party​

The Democratic Socialists of America behind rising Democratic star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is rife with Marxists and other far-left radicals.
dailycaller.com

Among so many things you don't know, who Tom Perez is is one more glaring example.

Tom Perez​

Former United States Secretary of Labor

Description

Description​

Thomas Edward Perez is an American politician and attorney who served as the Chair of the Democratic National Committee from February 2017 until January 2021. Perez was previously Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights and United States Secretary of Labor. Wikipedia
Born: October 7, 1961 (age 59 years), Buffalo, NY
Spouse: Ann Marie Staudenmaier
Party: Democratic Party
Education: Harvard Kennedy School (1987), Harvard Law School (1987), Brown University





Upon reading your posts, one cannot but be amazed that you find your way out of the washroom each day.

 

[Oddball]

Synthaholic
and your avatar is a RACIST bigot!!
hahahahahhhahahahahaha

And a bigamist.....And a student loan fraudster....And a ballot box stuffer...

 

[PoliticalChic]

This idea that anyone can violate a law based on a religious belief that they hold is absurd. It is a recipe for chaos. Nobody knows how many religious beliefs exist among the world's religions. In Christianity alone, there is a huge variety of beliefs and Christian groups often contradict each other, so just declaring that one is a Christian does nothing to indicate what belief is at issue.

Public accommodation laws are intended to protect the public. Despite the idiotic contention that a rejected customer has some obligation to leave and remain silent, there is no such obligation, and there is no way a prospective customer would even know what a vendor's beliefs are in the first place. The consumer has to be protected, too.

"This idea that anyone can violate a law based on a religious belief that they hold is absurd."

One cannot imagine an educated person saying that, with knowledge of the deeply religious folks who founded this country.

They'd be deeply ashamed of you.

But....if you vote Democrat, you have no same.

What political party a person votes for is irrelevant.

The "deeply religious folks" you mentioned never agreed among themselves about anything. What went on between them involved whipping, banishment, and hanging.

Look up Roger Williams, Ann Hutchinson, both Puritans, and Mary Dyer and the three other Quakers who were hanged on Boston Common for the crime of being Quaker. A lot of fun was had by all. One of my high school teachers was descended from one of the judges who presided over the Salem Witch Trials, and one of my classmates was a descendent of one of the people they hanged. so there was some hilarity.

Washington attended Christ Episcopal in Alexandria, VA (a friend of mine and I onced prayed at every headstone in the churchyard, and we both admitted to having accidentally prayed over the water connection). Jefferson was a Deist. Of course, Protestants and Catholics celebrated religious freedom in the 19th Century by rioting against each other.

And this was all between Christians. I believe that Jewish people started arriving in the 18th Century, and that the first synogogue was built in Truro, RI, although there might have been one earlier in NYC. By the present day, more religous people from a plethora of religons have become Americans.

This all does not include the beliefs of Native People, who were here before the Europeans.

I'm not sure which, if any of them, would be ashamed of me.

"Jefferson was a Deist."
No he wasn't.

Try to use terms you actually understand......although that might leave you mute.



The truth about American's founders is..."all of whom, even if some did not individually adhere to orthodox Christianity, were steeped in the Judeo-Christian tradition.

Here’s what we can say for certain about their religious beliefs.

a) All of the Founders believed in a transcendent God, that is, a Creator who exists outside of nature.
b) All the Founders believed in a God who imposes moral obligations on human beings
c) All the Founders believed in a God who punishes bad behavior and rewards good behavior in an afterlife."

https://www.prageru.com/courses/history/were-founders-religious

As the dupes of the Left throw around terms to make their case, let's see what "Deist" actually means.

4. As there is far, far too much evidence for the Judeo-Christian basis of our nation, those on the Left....desiring to adhere to Marx's doctrines....attempt to call the Founders 'deists' to attempt to pry them from being called 'religious.'

de•ism
noun
belief in the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator who does not intervene in the universe. The term is used chiefly of an intellectual movement of the 17th and 18th centuries that accepted the existence of a creator on the basis of reason but rejected belief in a supernatural deity who interacts with humankind. Google




5. "The notion that any of the Founders believed in an impersonal deity who merely created the universe and then left it to itself is false. All of them believed in a God who, as Franklin said at the Constitutional Convention, “governs in the affairs of men.”

 

[lantern2814]

In business? Then serve everyone equally.

Service may be denied to anybody at any time for any reason. Religious objections are legal. This gets revisited and the florist wins. Like the baker in Colorado who has been targeted by homos every since he won. And won every case.

 

[Lysistrata]

PoliticalChic

Trying to identify our political parties with specific religions is a grave mistake on your part.The decision to specify in the Constitution that the government is forbidden to establish a religion was grounded in the wisdom acquired by observing the religious strife in Europe and the colonies. The personal religious beliefs of "The Founders" are not significant.

You fail to acknowledge both the wide variety of opinions and beliefs among the various Christian groups and the fact that we now have citizens from just about every one of the world's religions, as well as atheists and agnostics, and all of us share the same government and are entitled to the equal protection of our laws.

The fact that the right to religious freedom of choice belongs to each and every individual has both good and bad implications. It is good that we all may move from faith to faith, or choose not to practice a faith, according to our own minds, but it is bad that an individual may choose a belief that involves interfering with the lives and rights of others and then expect their negative actions toward these others to be protected by the government at the expense of those being attacked.

There are many Christians who support the Democratic Party, preferring the policies put forth by Democrats to those put forth by Republicans, which indicates that a split exists between various factions of the Christian faith. The Republican Party seems to have gone full-blown Protestant fundamentalist, with the occasional nod to the Catholics when the Catholics agree with certain stances taken by the Protestant fundamentalists.

Marxism has nothing to do with any of this.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

PoliticalChic

Trying to identify our political parties with specific religions is a grave mistake on your part.The decision to specify in the Constitution that the government is forbidden to establish a religion was grounded in the wisdom acquired by observing the religious strife in Europe and the colonies. The personal religious beliefs of "The Founders" are not significant.

You fail to acknowledge both the wide variety of opinions and beliefs among the various Christian groups and the fact that we now have citizens from just about every one of the world's religions, as well as atheists and agnostics, and all of us share the same government and are entitled to the equal protection of our laws.

The fact that the right to religious freedom of choice belongs to each and every individual has both good and bad implications. It is good that we all may move from faith to faith, or choose not to practice a faith, according to our own minds, but it is bad that an individual may choose a belief that involves interfering with the lives and rights of others and then expect their negative actions toward these others to be protected by the government at the expense of those being attacked.

There are many Christians who support the Democratic Party, preferring the policies put forth by Democrats to those put forth by Republicans, which indicates that a split exists between various factions of the Christian faith. The Republican Party seems to have gone full-blown Protestant fundamentalist, with the occasional nod to the Catholics when the Catholics agree with certain stances taken by the Protestant fundamentalists.

Marxism has nothing to do with any of this.

Many of these "Christians" seem to have a very selective faith. I would not give much weight to any of their loony ravings.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Why would people want to hire someone that does not want to work for them unless they are ust looking for a lawsuit.

When I go into a store, I don't want to think "do they like me, do they agree with me?"

I go in, and buy what is the cheapest/best etc. Why should politics come into it?

Do you really want white stores and black stores because "the white dude doesn't like black people?" Maybe some do, that's their choice, many just prefer no to know.