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.
The Bible doesnāt say thou shalt not serve Republicans, either, but I didnāt hear Democrats objecting when a restaurant owner threw Sarah Huckabee Saunders and her CHILDREN out.A person cannot just arbitrarily invent religious beliefs that say they have to discriminate. The bible does not say thou shalt not serve faggots. This is the result of the unholy marriage of evangelicals and politics. Suddenly the current political attitudes of the far right become religious belief even if it's contrary to what the bible says.
Still bored.Jack, were you able to type all that out with your finger, nose, or the tip of your pencil-dick? Or maybe you used a trained parrot? BTW, Jack, what's your score for this woke sjw ranking, about 187?
Or were you trying to tell us your brain is really bored?
View attachment 757515
About 4 inches deep with a 5/8ths inch drill bit.
I don't know about incident you are talking about but restaurants and bars can deny service to disruptive individuals. Was she running her big fat mouth?The Bible doesnāt say thou shalt not serve Republicans, either, but I didnāt hear Democrats objecting when a restaurant owner threw Sarah Huckabee Saunders and her CHILDREN out.
And thatās another example of the OPās āprotection hierarchy.ā The Dems race in to INSIST a private business bake a cake for a gay wedding, but sure didnāt race in screaming when a private business didnāt serve a Republican.
No, but your disdain for Republican women is evident.I don't know about incident you are talking about but restaurants and bars can deny service to disruptive individuals. Was she running her big fat mouth?
Still bored.
Since I don't know about the incident you mentioned it's hard to say. Maybe you can post a decent link or something?No, but your disdain for Republican women is evident.
So why is a restaurant allowed to kick a Republican out of the place - along with her children - because they disapprove of her politics, but a baker is forced to serve someone even though she disapproves of the sexual deviancy?
All youāre doing is proving he OPās premise. Leftists protect certain groups and demean others.
Since I don't know about the incident you mentioned it's hard to say. Maybe you can post a decent link or something?
nypost.com
Still a pretty one sided account but a restaurant can kick people out for nearly any reason. The reason given here is that she worked for Trump. Perfectly kosher to tell potential troublemakers to leave. Many ex Trump people are still trying to wash off the slime he put on their reputations.Sarah Huckabee Sanders booted from Virginia eatery
Another high-ranking female member of the Trump administration was hounded out of a restaurant. White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders claimed she and seven members of her family were kā¦
So if restaurants can refuse service based on politics, then a baker can refuse service based on their preferences.Still a pretty one sided account but a restaurant can kick people out for nearly any reason. The reason given here is that she worked for Trump. Perfectly kosher to tell potential troublemakers to leave. Many ex Trump people are still trying to wash off the slime he put on their reputations.
If your reason is that you hate queers you're fucking up. Groups who have been traditionally persecuted and discriminated against are protected by civil rights laws. The mouthpiece of a deeply unpopular president is not.So if restaurants can refuse service based on politics, then a baker can refuse service based on their preferences.
I donāt hate gay people - just pointing out your double standard. If a restaurant owner is allowed to refuse to serve a Republican, then a baker should be allowed to refuse to serve a gay couple.If your reason is that you hate queers you're fucking up. Groups who have been traditionally persecuted and discriminated against are protected by civil rights laws. The mouthpiece of a deeply unpopular president is not.
He didn't refuse to serve a republican, He refused to serve the most dishonest person in America.I donāt hate gay people - just pointing out your double standard. If a restaurant owner is allowed to refuse to serve a Republican, then a baker should be allowed to refuse to serve a gay couple.
And youāre proving OPās premise: gays are high up on the āprotectionā scale. Straight, white Christians are not.
Thatās your leftism talking.He didn't refuse to serve a republican, He refused to serve the most dishonest person in America.
If you don't understand by now it's because you don't want to. There are certainly double standards out there. Are you afraid of losing the multitude that favor white people?Thatās your leftism talking.
Now if a restaurant owner kicked KJP out on her butt, you people would Be screamingā¦.raaaacist!!!ā¦..homophobe!!ā¦ā¦etc., etc., thus again demonstrating the OPās point.
Lying, incompetent idiot who is black and gay will be protected. Smart straight white Christian is maligned and refused service.
It all goes back to OPās rankings.
A person cannot just arbitrarily invent religious beliefs that say they have to discriminate. The bible does not say thou shalt not serve faggots. This is the result of the unholy marriage of evangelicals and politics. Suddenly the current political attitudes of the far right become religious belief even if it's contrary to what the bible says.
You still refuse to understand that civil rights cases that may establish a new legal precedent have to be fought to a conclusion even if it's the supreme court. It's ended up not being just about a baker. It was over the question of religious bigotry being protected or not.You or the government doesn't get to say what the bible says to someone, unless there is compelling government reason, and even then you have to mitigate it using the least intrusive method possible.
You just get off on forcing people to do things you want them to do that they don't want to do, over the most chickenshit things possible.
You still refuse to understand that civil rights cases that may establish a new legal precedent have to be fought to a conclusion even if it's the supreme court. It's ended up not being just about a baker. It was over the question of religious bigotry being protected or not.
