Which "side" of the "fence" are you on?

[danielpalos]

People are part of businesses, and they still have rights. Stop trying to pretend that isn't the case.

The law shouldn't be punishing them for butt hurt in the first place.

They weren't punished for butthurt. They were punished for discrimination based on sexual orientation, which is a crime in Oregon.

They were punished for butt hurt.

And it's not a "crime" it's a civil violation. There is a difference.

Like, "crossing without inspection"?

No, like being a civil code violation, not a criminal code violation.

Crossing without inspection is a civil offense.

 

[martybegan]

People are part of businesses, and they still have rights. Stop trying to pretend that isn't the case.

The law shouldn't be punishing them for butt hurt in the first place.

They weren't punished for butthurt. They were punished for discrimination based on sexual orientation, which is a crime in Oregon.

They were punished for butt hurt.

And it's not a "crime" it's a civil violation. There is a difference.

Like, "crossing without inspection"?

No, like being a civil code violation, not a criminal code violation.

Crossing without inspection is a civil offense.

Are you talking about jaywalking?

 

[danielpalos]

They weren't punished for butthurt. They were punished for discrimination based on sexual orientation, which is a crime in Oregon.

They were punished for butt hurt.

And it's not a "crime" it's a civil violation. There is a difference.

Like, "crossing without inspection"?

No, like being a civil code violation, not a criminal code violation.

Crossing without inspection is a civil offense.

Are you talking about jaywalking?

no, i am talking about the hypocrisy of the right wing.

 

[martybegan]

They were punished for butt hurt.

And it's not a "crime" it's a civil violation. There is a difference.

Like, "crossing without inspection"?

No, like being a civil code violation, not a criminal code violation.

Crossing without inspection is a civil offense.

Are you talking about jaywalking?

no, i am talking about the hypocrisy of the right wing.

What hypocrisy?

 

[danielpalos]

Like, "crossing without inspection"?

No, like being a civil code violation, not a criminal code violation.

Crossing without inspection is a civil offense.

Are you talking about jaywalking?

no, i am talking about the hypocrisy of the right wing.

What hypocrisy?

Claiming illegals are all criminals.

 

[martybegan]

No, like being a civil code violation, not a criminal code violation.

Crossing without inspection is a civil offense.

Are you talking about jaywalking?

no, i am talking about the hypocrisy of the right wing.

What hypocrisy?

Claiming illegals are all criminals.

Even if they aren't criminals, the penalty for violating the civil code is to be deported.

 

[danielpalos]

Crossing without inspection is a civil offense.

Are you talking about jaywalking?

no, i am talking about the hypocrisy of the right wing.

What hypocrisy?

Claiming illegals are all criminals.

Even if they aren't criminals, the penalty for violating the civil code is to be deported.

or pay a fine?

 

[martybegan]

Are you talking about jaywalking?

no, i am talking about the hypocrisy of the right wing.

What hypocrisy?

Claiming illegals are all criminals.

Even if they aren't criminals, the penalty for violating the civil code is to be deported.

or pay a fine?

No, leave and come back legally. anything else would be an affront to the people who followed the rules.

 

[JoeB131]

You would know if you were working their wedding. The point is they did not deny Point of sale services, they just didn't want to participate in the wedding by supplying the cake.

PA laws cover the point of sale transaction, not the contracted service, and if the SC is not crazy, that's how they will vote on the upcoming case.

I think you are trying to find a loophole where being a homophobe will be okay. But then you open up a loophole were being a racist is okay. So if the Supreme Court is smart, they'll stick to 40 years of case law on this and rule that public accommodations include all business.

 

[martybegan]

You would know if you were working their wedding. The point is they did not deny Point of sale services, they just didn't want to participate in the wedding by supplying the cake.

PA laws cover the point of sale transaction, not the contracted service, and if the SC is not crazy, that's how they will vote on the upcoming case.

I think you are trying to find a loophole where being a homophobe will be okay. But then you open up a loophole were being a racist is okay. So if the Supreme Court is smart, they'll stick to 40 years of case law on this and rule that public accommodations include all business.

It's no loophole, it merely recognizes that free exercise is just that, free exercise.

 

[JoeB131]

It's no loophole, it merely recognizes that free exercise is just that, free exercise.

But we already determined that this doesn't apply to businesses. This was determined when some Cleetus tried to say God didn't want him renting rooms to black folks at his hotel.

The real problem is that once you allow a loophole, that opens a lot of other loopholes, and frankly pretty soon you are back to the bad old days of businesses being able to abuse people.

When it is probably easier to just get the homophobes to straighten out their act.

 

[sealybobo]

This latest incident violent incident in Charlottesville is once again illustrating how our divisions are increasing, and how the "sides" of the "fence" are becoming more clear.

On one side of the fence, we have the people who appear to think they're "accomplishing" something by screaming at, verbally attacking, insulting, blaming, and now, finally, physically attacking and even KILLING those who dare to disagree with them. Attack, attack, attack, no matter what.

Their political affiliations are irrelevant, because their behaviors are so similar. They would much rather scream than communicate. They would much rather attack than heal. They would much rather "beat" those who dare to disagree than find a way to co-exist with them like normal, well-adjusted adults.

On the other side of the fence is the majority of the country, those who know that the only way to solve problems is to communicate and cooperate. That you're not always going to get your way. That sometimes you have to be a little humble, check your ego, and respect differing opinions. And that -- horror of horrors -- you may actually be wrong about something now and then.

So, which side of the fence are you on?
.

You're the problem bro! You're talking about divisive stuff like anthems

 

[Mac1958]

This latest incident violent incident in Charlottesville is once again illustrating how our divisions are increasing, and how the "sides" of the "fence" are becoming more clear.

On one side of the fence, we have the people who appear to think they're "accomplishing" something by screaming at, verbally attacking, insulting, blaming, and now, finally, physically attacking and even KILLING those who dare to disagree with them. Attack, attack, attack, no matter what.

Their political affiliations are irrelevant, because their behaviors are so similar. They would much rather scream than communicate. They would much rather attack than heal. They would much rather "beat" those who dare to disagree than find a way to co-exist with them like normal, well-adjusted adults.

On the other side of the fence is the majority of the country, those who know that the only way to solve problems is to communicate and cooperate. That you're not always going to get your way. That sometimes you have to be a little humble, check your ego, and respect differing opinions. And that -- horror of horrors -- you may actually be wrong about something now and then.

So, which side of the fence are you on?
.

You're the problem bro! You're talking about divisive stuff like anthems

Okay bro!
.