Hmmm...I thought churches didn't have to worry about performing gay marriages...what about this...

[Anathema]

Or you can just provide the services you promise to offer. It's really not complicated.

Some of us have more respect for Morality and the health of our Soul than to associate with immoral people any more than absolutely necessary. I couldn't and wouldn't own or operate a public business.

 

[JoeB131]

Or you can just provide the services you promise to offer. It's really not complicated.

Some of us have more respect for Morality and the health of our Soul than to associate with immoral people any more than absolutely necessary. I couldn't and wouldn't own or operate a public business.

Okay, you see, this is why I don't take these kinds of arguments seriously.

There are a lot more serious immorality in this society- poverty, racism, sexism - than who is having the butt sex with other dudes.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Don't run a business for weddings if you don't want to marry certain folks.

 

[martybegan]

Don't run a business for weddings if you don't want to marry certain folks.

SUBMIT WORKERS!!!!

Commie asshat.

 

[martybegan]

They are running a business, not a religion.

Hence they fall under business law and must not discriminate.

Where in the 1st amendment does freedom of religion go away when you are part of a business?

This is neither a First Amendment nor religion issue, it's a Commerce Clause issue, where the Commerce Clause authorizes public accommodations laws.

Moreover, religious dogma cannot be used to 'justify' or 'excuse' violating any law, that you believe your religion allows you to discriminate against gay Americans is legally invalid and irrelevant.

and where does it say the commerce clause removes your 1st amendment rights?

The commerce clause is the greatest excuse used by the "**** you do what I want you to do crowd"

How is interstate commerce affected by a gay couple having to spend up to another hour or so finding another chapel/photographer/baker?

 

[martybegan]

They are running a business, not a religion.

Hence they fall under business law and must not discriminate.

Where in the 1st amendment does freedom of religion go away when you are part of a business?

You have a first amendment right. Your business does not.

Thats a cop out and you know it. People do not lose their rights just to perform commerce.

 

[martybegan]

If you are not going to use the quote function to let a person know you are replying, at least use the mention function.

Anything else is chickenshit.

martytranslation: I didn't know there wasn't a needed quote.

Starkeyobservation: marty is stupider than tard.

Sil is making an observation that has nothing to with the OP.

Its still chickenshit, its an attempt to get in the last word, and you know it.

What a ******* coward you are.

Martytranslation: Marty is unhappy that he is not getting the last word.

That would imply you ever got a first one in. None of your posts come close to making a rational point about anything.

Does one have to have a rational point about anything" to have the last word? Seems like you are complaining about two different things that don't have to have anything to do with each other.......................again.

and the 2nd fascist chimes in.

 

[martybegan]

Sil, you know nothing.

If you are not going to use the quote function to let a person know you are replying, at least use the mention function.

Anything else is chickenshit.

It is all supposed to be about tolerance of other people...except when that means leaving religious people alone...the first attempts to go after churches are happening and are being beaten back...but this is just the start...like when the lawyers wanted the sermons of ministers...but then they backed off...for now...how about this threat...?

The PJ Tatler Idaho City Threatens to Jail Ministers for Not Performing Gay Weddings

Coeur d’Alene officials told the Knapps privately and also publicly stated that the couple would violate the city’s public accommodations statute once same-sex marriage became legal in Idaho if they declined to perform a same-sex ceremony at their chapel. On Friday, the Knapps respectfully declined such a ceremony and now face up to 180 days in jail and up to $1,000 in fines for each day they decline to perform that ceremony.

“The city somehow expects ordained pastors to flip a switch and turn off all faithfulness to their God and their vows,” explained ADF Legal Counsel Jonathan Scruggs. “The U.S. Constitution as well as federal and state law clearly stand against that. The city cannot mandate across-the-board conformity to its interpretation of a city ordinance in utter disregard for the guaranteed freedoms Americans treasure in our society.”

"Donald Knapp and his wife, Evelyn, both ordained ministers who run Hitching Post Wedding Chapel..."


not a church FAIL.

And the city never threatened them with jail at all.

Big fail.

They don't have to threaten, its in the law.

 

[Seawytch]

They are running a business, not a religion.

Hence they fall under business law and must not discriminate.

Where in the 1st amendment does freedom of religion go away when you are part of a business?

You have a first amendment right. Your business does not.

Thats a cop out and you know it. People do not lose their rights just to perform commerce.

If you perform commerce, you must follow the business laws of the locality in which you operate. You don't get to choose which laws you want to follow based on your personal religious beliefs. If they have such "deeply held" religious beliefs, they can become a church. (But then they wouldn't be worshiping the allmighty dollar)

 

[martybegan]

They are running a business, not a religion.

Hence they fall under business law and must not discriminate.

Where in the 1st amendment does freedom of religion go away when you are part of a business?

You have a first amendment right. Your business does not.

Thats a cop out and you know it. People do not lose their rights just to perform commerce.

If you perform commerce, you must follow the business laws of the locality in which you operate. You don't get to choose which laws you want to follow based on your personal religious beliefs. If they have such "deeply held" religious beliefs, they can become a church. (But then they wouldn't be worshiping the allmighty dollar)

So how do business laws trump constitutional rights exactly? Its funny, but the word "chuch" isn't found anywhere in the constitution, what is found is the free exercise of religion.

 

[Seawytch]

They are running a business, not a religion.

Hence they fall under business law and must not discriminate.

Where in the 1st amendment does freedom of religion go away when you are part of a business?

You have a first amendment right. Your business does not.

Thats a cop out and you know it. People do not lose their rights just to perform commerce.

If you perform commerce, you must follow the business laws of the locality in which you operate. You don't get to choose which laws you want to follow based on your personal religious beliefs. If they have such "deeply held" religious beliefs, they can become a church. (But then they wouldn't be worshiping the allmighty dollar)

So how do business laws trump constitutional rights exactly? Its funny, but the word "chuch" isn't found anywhere in the constitution, what is found is the free exercise of religion.

The exercise of their religion isn't infringed upon. Nobody is preventing them from practicing their religion.

What other laws do you think the religious should be able to ignore?

 

[martybegan]

Where in the 1st amendment does freedom of religion go away when you are part of a business?

You have a first amendment right. Your business does not.

Thats a cop out and you know it. People do not lose their rights just to perform commerce.

If you perform commerce, you must follow the business laws of the locality in which you operate. You don't get to choose which laws you want to follow based on your personal religious beliefs. If they have such "deeply held" religious beliefs, they can become a church. (But then they wouldn't be worshiping the allmighty dollar)

So how do business laws trump constitutional rights exactly? Its funny, but the word "chuch" isn't found anywhere in the constitution, what is found is the free exercise of religion.

The exercise of their religion isn't infringed upon. Nobody is preventing them from practicing their religion.

What other laws do you think the religious should be able to ignore?

The laws shouldn't make them ignore them in the first place.

Its not up to the government to decide how people can practice their religion unless said practice causes irreparable harm, or the people work for the government.

Having to go to another wedding hall is not irreparable harm. Now if the government did it, it would be a different story.

 

[Seawytch]

You have a first amendment right. Your business does not.

Thats a cop out and you know it. People do not lose their rights just to perform commerce.

If you perform commerce, you must follow the business laws of the locality in which you operate. You don't get to choose which laws you want to follow based on your personal religious beliefs. If they have such "deeply held" religious beliefs, they can become a church. (But then they wouldn't be worshiping the allmighty dollar)

So how do business laws trump constitutional rights exactly? Its funny, but the word "chuch" isn't found anywhere in the constitution, what is found is the free exercise of religion.

The exercise of their religion isn't infringed upon. Nobody is preventing them from practicing their religion.

What other laws do you think the religious should be able to ignore?

The laws shouldn't make them ignore them in the first place.

Its not up to the government to decide how people can practice their religion unless said practice causes irreparable harm, or the people work for the government.

Having to go to another wedding hall is not irreparable harm. Now if the government did it, it would be a different story.

The government isn't governing how they practice their religion, but how they run their business. You open a business, you adhere to the business laws of the locality.

They are a for profit business. They can hire someone to perform the ceremonies they have a personal religious objection to....or, they can become a church.

 

[martybegan]

Thats a cop out and you know it. People do not lose their rights just to perform commerce.

If you perform commerce, you must follow the business laws of the locality in which you operate. You don't get to choose which laws you want to follow based on your personal religious beliefs. If they have such "deeply held" religious beliefs, they can become a church. (But then they wouldn't be worshiping the allmighty dollar)

So how do business laws trump constitutional rights exactly? Its funny, but the word "chuch" isn't found anywhere in the constitution, what is found is the free exercise of religion.

The exercise of their religion isn't infringed upon. Nobody is preventing them from practicing their religion.

What other laws do you think the religious should be able to ignore?

The laws shouldn't make them ignore them in the first place.

Its not up to the government to decide how people can practice their religion unless said practice causes irreparable harm, or the people work for the government.

Having to go to another wedding hall is not irreparable harm. Now if the government did it, it would be a different story.

The government isn't governing how they practice their religion, but how they run their business. You open a business, you adhere to the business laws of the locality.

They are a for profit business. They can hire someone to perform the ceremonies they have a personal religious objection to....or, they can become a church.

And again, where in the constitution does the government get the right to do this? You are not answering the question.

You keep saying things that are basically "just because" responses.

What makes you be the one who can force others adjust to your whims and desires? Especially since the service is 1) non-essential) and 2) easy to get from someone else.

 

[Syriusly]

Sil, you know nothing.

If you are not going to use the quote function to let a person know you are replying, at least use the mention function.

Anything else is chickenshit.

It is all supposed to be about tolerance of other people...except when that means leaving religious people alone...the first attempts to go after churches are happening and are being beaten back...but this is just the start...like when the lawyers wanted the sermons of ministers...but then they backed off...for now...how about this threat...?

The PJ Tatler Idaho City Threatens to Jail Ministers for Not Performing Gay Weddings

Coeur d’Alene officials told the Knapps privately and also publicly stated that the couple would violate the city’s public accommodations statute once same-sex marriage became legal in Idaho if they declined to perform a same-sex ceremony at their chapel. On Friday, the Knapps respectfully declined such a ceremony and now face up to 180 days in jail and up to $1,000 in fines for each day they decline to perform that ceremony.

“The city somehow expects ordained pastors to flip a switch and turn off all faithfulness to their God and their vows,” explained ADF Legal Counsel Jonathan Scruggs. “The U.S. Constitution as well as federal and state law clearly stand against that. The city cannot mandate across-the-board conformity to its interpretation of a city ordinance in utter disregard for the guaranteed freedoms Americans treasure in our society.”

"Donald Knapp and his wife, Evelyn, both ordained ministers who run Hitching Post Wedding Chapel..."


not a church FAIL.

And the city never threatened them with jail at all.

Big fail.

They don't have to threaten, its in the law.

Just pointing out that the articles- and claims that the City threatened them with jail time were just lies.

 

[martybegan]

Sil, you know nothing.

If you are not going to use the quote function to let a person know you are replying, at least use the mention function.

Anything else is chickenshit.

It is all supposed to be about tolerance of other people...except when that means leaving religious people alone...the first attempts to go after churches are happening and are being beaten back...but this is just the start...like when the lawyers wanted the sermons of ministers...but then they backed off...for now...how about this threat...?

The PJ Tatler Idaho City Threatens to Jail Ministers for Not Performing Gay Weddings

Coeur d’Alene officials told the Knapps privately and also publicly stated that the couple would violate the city’s public accommodations statute once same-sex marriage became legal in Idaho if they declined to perform a same-sex ceremony at their chapel. On Friday, the Knapps respectfully declined such a ceremony and now face up to 180 days in jail and up to $1,000 in fines for each day they decline to perform that ceremony.

“The city somehow expects ordained pastors to flip a switch and turn off all faithfulness to their God and their vows,” explained ADF Legal Counsel Jonathan Scruggs. “The U.S. Constitution as well as federal and state law clearly stand against that. The city cannot mandate across-the-board conformity to its interpretation of a city ordinance in utter disregard for the guaranteed freedoms Americans treasure in our society.”

"Donald Knapp and his wife, Evelyn, both ordained ministers who run Hitching Post Wedding Chapel..."


not a church FAIL.

And the city never threatened them with jail at all.

Big fail.

They don't have to threaten, its in the law.

Just pointing out that the articles- and claims that the City threatened them with jail time were just lies.

Does the law include jail time? Did the city reference the law as part of any non-compliance?

 

[Anathema]

Okay, you see, this is why I don't take these kinds of arguments seriously.

There are a lot more serious immorality in this society- poverty, racism, sexism - than who is having the butt sex with other dudes.

You don't gave to take it seriously, I do.

There are greater immorality issues in society. Things like Social Welfare spending, Globalism, and Affirmative Action. The LGBT community gets the wrath because they won't do the easy thing and keep their disgusting perversions in private where they belong.

 

[Syriusly]

If you perform commerce, you must follow the business laws of the locality in which you operate. You don't get to choose which laws you want to follow based on your personal religious beliefs. If they have such "deeply held" religious beliefs, they can become a church. (But then they wouldn't be worshiping the allmighty dollar)

So how do business laws trump constitutional rights exactly? Its funny, but the word "chuch" isn't found anywhere in the constitution, what is found is the free exercise of religion.

The exercise of their religion isn't infringed upon. Nobody is preventing them from practicing their religion.

What other laws do you think the religious should be able to ignore?

The laws shouldn't make them ignore them in the first place.

Its not up to the government to decide how people can practice their religion unless said practice causes irreparable harm, or the people work for the government.

Having to go to another wedding hall is not irreparable harm. Now if the government did it, it would be a different story.

The government isn't governing how they practice their religion, but how they run their business. You open a business, you adhere to the business laws of the locality.

They are a for profit business. They can hire someone to perform the ceremonies they have a personal religious objection to....or, they can become a church.

And again, where in the constitution does the government get the right to do this? You are not answering the question.

You keep saying things that are basically "just because" responses.

What makes you be the one who can force others adjust to your whims and desires? Especially since the service is 1) non-essential) and 2) easy to get from someone else.

Well that is why this whole controversy was ginned up by Conservative activists- so they could go to court to argue something to that effect.

Conservatives have hated public accommodation laws ever since they were told that they had to serve negroes- this will be another Conservative test case.

 

[Syriusly]

Sil, you know nothing.

If you are not going to use the quote function to let a person know you are replying, at least use the mention function.

Anything else is chickenshit.

It is all supposed to be about tolerance of other people...except when that means leaving religious people alone...the first attempts to go after churches are happening and are being beaten back...but this is just the start...like when the lawyers wanted the sermons of ministers...but then they backed off...for now...how about this threat...?

The PJ Tatler Idaho City Threatens to Jail Ministers for Not Performing Gay Weddings

"Donald Knapp and his wife, Evelyn, both ordained ministers who run Hitching Post Wedding Chapel..."


not a church FAIL.

And the city never threatened them with jail at all.

Big fail.

They don't have to threaten, its in the law.

Just pointing out that the articles- and claims that the City threatened them with jail time were just lies.

Does the law include jail time? Did the city reference the law as part of any non-compliance?

Feel free to read the letter the City sent in response to being sued by the Conservative activist attorneys.

 

[Syriusly]

Don't run a business for weddings if you don't want to marry certain folks.

SUBMIT WORKERS!!!!

Commie asshat.

No different than saying "Don't run a business for weddings if you dont' want to get a business permit".

Conservatives are going to love this case as a way to challenge public accomodation laws.

Because doing so against gays is something the Conservative base will applaud....but if they had filed the same kind of challenge by business owners who refused to do business with Blacks or Jews or Latinos......well that might possibly be something some Conservatives would be
embarrassed by.