Posted on 12/04/2022 11:25:41 PM PST by Olog-hai
Freedom of Association was effectively abolished with the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Exactly. This is a “compelled speech” issue more than a religious one imo. You could be an atheist and believe gay marriage isn’t equal, or needed, in society - where making a cake for a wedding isn’t something you want to support. So don’t. It is the content of the work that is at issue here. That the belief in traditional marriage may derive from Christian doctrine isn’t the issue, other cultures also have had this standard.
To have the power of the State forcing you to comply not only compels speech but also compels you to enter into a contract, it isn’t the same as a ‘buying coffee’ transaction. If you do not comply then the State will fine and/or imprison you.
That is so far beyond a simple encroachment on your right to liberty as you can imagine. You may have the right to ‘marry’ but forcing others to use a creative skill and enter a contract to make an item with messaging they disagree with violates the rights of the maker.
“Religious liberties are in the Constitution...period.”
And how did that Freedom to Worship thing work out during WuFlu? Trump is right in that we might as well not have a Constitution any more. It’s being overruled often, and pretty much worthless.
“No religious text says to discriminate against races or religions.”
That’s true — IF you don’t consider the Bible “religious text”. It’s clear that it’s a Christian’s DUTY to discriminate. (And that ties in to it being a Christian’s duty to judge.)
“Just go buy another cake somewhere else.”
It’s not about a cake, just like the masks were not about Covid.
It’s all about control of Americans’ lives.
Yep. Plenty of bakers who will do their bidding. But these fags are deliberately looking for quick cash from nuisance lawsuits.
Society was far better off when fags remained in the closet.
‘Eff Scotus.
“if she wins, a range of businesses will be able to discriminate, refusing to serve (b)lack customers, Jewish or Muslim people, interracial or interfaith couples or immigrants, among others.”
So?
Theater owners, restaurants, hotels, etc. were required to segregate. The business owners had no choice in the matter.
In the Plessy case, the East Louisiana Railroad was required by law to have separate rail cars for for black and whites, which meant they had to buy twice as many rail cars as they really needed. Not exactly live as let live.
For all it's flaws, the 1964 Civil Rights Act was undoing the damage of 70+ years of mandatory segregation.
Not really.
If your cars hold 40 people each, and 400 people want to get from Point A to Point B, it'll take 10 cars.
if 80 of those folks are black, they'll be in 2 cars while the whites are in 8 of them.
Thus, same amount of cars needed.
No. Stay in the closet. Enjoy your perversions in private.
What ever happened where your rights ends where mine begin and vis-a-versa?. So sick of this crap. I’m sure there are other artists, bakers who would gladly serve the gay community. This is no more than bullying for political purposes. We are not talking discrimination of race or skin color. This is religious liberty we are talking about. Try going to a Muslim owned business and ask about them making a Christian themed art or cake. Let’s see how far that goes.
You are so right, they can’t have it both ways. This is so convoluted.
This. Why is it that the qwerty folks go after the Christians and not the Muslims? Why? Because they KNOW the Muslim will not bake a gay cake and they KNOW the Muslims would win in court, but the Christian will always be held to different rules than the Muslims and are easy pickings.
Roberts and team just decided it’s totally cool for a committee of the House to trespass the private income tax returns of citizens, including political opponents. The new House should accommodate Roberts’ position good and hard.
That's not really true. The Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act applies to Twitter just as much as it does to this woman's business.
Twitter can't discriminate on the basis of sex, age, race, or other protected categories.
The problem is, political ideology isn't one of the protected classes.
Plessy v. Ferguson was WRONG too!! Mandatory segregation is just as UNCONSTITUTIONAL as MANDATORY INTEGRATION!!
If you are FOR the 1964 Civil Rights Laws, then you are AGAINST FREEDOM - PERIOD!
I would say that your citations are referring to fellow ‘brothers’, not outsiders.
I Cor 5:
9I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people—
10not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world.
11But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one.
12For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?
13God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”
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.