Because any thread with S.E. Cupp in the headline ought to have a photo. I am shocked that there are 90-something replies and not one single photo.
Posted on 02/26/2013 1:18:27 PM PST by EveningStar
Following in fellow MSNBC co-host Chris Hayes’s footsteps, the network’s conservative pundit S. E. Cupp has withdrawn from speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference next month over the issue of same-sex marriage and the exclusion of GOProud. Cupp announced her decision to back out on The Cycle earlier this afternoon.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Back to the DUmp, where you belong.
>> But its not legal for a photographer to refuse to photograph a gay wedding party.
That’s right. In fact, the photographer was persecuted for it.
There are other instances of this kind homosexual tyranny.
“Homosexual marriage” law is designed to persecute those that refuse to support and service homosexual behavior. Period.
Because any thread with S.E. Cupp in the headline ought to have a photo. I am shocked that there are 90-something replies and not one single photo.
"Do not think I come to bring peace on earth; I come not to bring peace, but a sword."---Matthew 10:34
Its wrong to force any private businessman to do business with anyone he he doesn’t want to do business with short of a life and death situation.
Then be a private businessman. If you want to sell your wares in private transactions you can do whatever you want. If you want the benefits of being "open to the public" then, depending on what you are doing or selling, your business license may have restrictions. If you don't like them, you can:
1. Move.
2. Choose a business with restrictions you can tolerate.
3. Change the laws.
There are other instances of this kind homosexual tyranny.
This photographer would also be "persecuted" for refusing to photograph a black wedding, or refusing to photograph a Jewish wedding.
This may be tyranny, but it's not specific to homosexuals. There are all kinds of realms subject to non-discrimination laws and more and more "sexual orientation" is being added to the list. These are local and state laws, so if you don't like them you can 1) move or 2) work to change the laws. The problem you'll have with option 2 is that if the laws exists in your area, they probably have broad public support.
They should include them ONLY if no one KNOWS their “orientation”....
>> This photographer would also be “persecuted” for refusing to photograph a black wedding, or refusing to photograph a Jewish wedding.
Are you equating anal sex with being Black or Jewish?
Are you equating anal sex with being Black or Jewish?
No, I'm saying that homosexuals are a protected class under some laws in some jurisdictions. I didn't make those laws. I'm just pointing out reality.
Sorry that reality upsets you.
Go over to DU, they will love you there.
“Never thought I’d say it, but this is my last input to FR; enjoy your own little world folks. “
Oh yes, the draaaama, it’s so dramatic!
Slapping people with your purse is just so manly there pal.
Maybe if you held your breath until people did things your way!
That’ll show them!
I don't know. Gutfeld's still got an audience (at 3 AM) and Ann Coulter (who admittedly doesn't go as far as Cupp) isn't exactly living in a cardboard box, so I get the feeling she'll do just fine.
If she really believed what she says she does, though, she should have gone to the conference anyway and said so, rather than pretend to be above or outside the rest of Washington conservativedom.
>> Sorry that reality upsets you.
It should concern you too that the govt is forcing the citizens to support and service homosexual behavior; a behavior which is completely unrelated to one’s faith and race.
Notwithstanding national security and protection from predators, the govt does not grant rights — it constrains liberty.
????????????????
What does that even mean? Why would Chris Hayes even be going to CPAC? It's not like he's a conservative by any conceivable definition of the word.
It was a feeling that there was not a sufficient difference now between the parties that kept a majority of the voters away from the polls. When have we ever advocated a closed-door policy? Who has ever been barred from participating?
Ronald Reagan CPAC 1975
Notwithstanding national security and protection from predators, the govt does not grant rights — it constrains liberty.
Which "government" are you talking about? Sexual orientation is not part of the anti-discrimination statues in my state. If you feel you're being forced to support homosexuality, then you're free to move here. It's one of the reasons states have rights.
Who wants to look at a dame with camel legs?
Where in the constitution does the government have any power whatsoever to FORCE homosexuality on an unwilling Christian society?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.