Good. Not only is this statute absurdly unconstitutional, it WILL come back to bit we Christians in our collective a**es as it will be used against us in time.
There are ways to write statutes that protect religious liberties but in the rush to be the “first” we end up with these unconstitutional laws, COPA being a perfect example.
This law would end up in hardcore discrimination against Christians. To think otherwise is to actually believe that RICO is just used against drug Kingpins as it was originally intended and touted.
But what DOES upset me are the cowardly RINOs who voted for it and are running from it. At least be a man and stand up for your beliefs regardless of the consequences.
“Good. Not only is this statute absurdly unconstitutional, it WILL come back to bit we Christians in our collective a**es as it will be used against us in time.”
Explain what is unconstitutional about it? Nowhere in the Bill of Rights are sodomites protected against discrimination.
Amen
Nonsense. In truly free nation, businesses should be able to choose to serve or not serve anyone for any reason. A nation can't be truly free if it eliminates freedom of association.
The response to unjust discrimination is soliciting businesses that don't discriminate, which MLK Jr. and others did.
What do you mean? What is the correct way to write a law that protects people’s religious liberties so that sodomy isn’t forced down their throats?