Can The Govt FORCE You To Promote A Choice That Goes Against Your Religion? The Fight Continues...

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

If religion were a free ticket to discrimination, every bigot in the country would declare his particular desires to discriminate as religious beliefs.

Religion isn't a free ticket to anything. It has nothing to do with the issue. Freedom of conscience is far more fundamental.

If you claim that your religion entitles you to disobey a law without penalty, that's claiming a free ticket.

Dear NYcarbineer the LGBT beliefs are also a creed.
That does not give advocates of those beliefs the right to penalize people of other creeds.

CREED is protected from discrimination.
Why can't you treat both equally as creeds, regardless which one you hold?

If you are Muslim, and a Muslim is pushing the anti-pork belief
on a Hindu business that is selling pork but not beef, suing them to substitute beef in an enchilada instead of pork, does this give you the right to violate the beliefs of the Hindu because
you and the other Muslims are pushing a case that favors YOUR beliefs?

Where is the equal protection in that?

I don't have to agree with LGBT, Christians or Muslims to defend rights to their beliefs from infringement discrimination disparagement or penalty by govt.
Do you have to agree with Christians before you will enforce laws defending their beliefs?

No, their beliefs are not creeds, they are sexual orientations, and therefore none of your or anybody else's business.

creed
krēd/
noun

1. 
   
   
   • a system of Christian or other religious belief; a faith.

Sexual orientation is not genetically fixed like race.

How someone expresses their inner beliefs and identity is on the same level of
CREED, like how someone expresses their Muslim Christian or Buddhist cultural IDENTITY.

NoTeaPartyPleez NYcarbineer there are many stories out there, cases of people coming out straight gay transgender
poly, etc.

Can you show me one person who started out as one ethnicity or race,
and through spiritual healing or change of lifestyle, became a different race?

Their genetics remains scientifically based on birth parents and what they inherited.
This is so specific, even the bone marrow donation programs target 4 minority groups
to save lives by finding matches that depend on ethnicity race even nationality matching:
African, Latino, Asian and Native American. This is SCIENCE based, down to 10 areas
that have to match in order for the HLA compatibility to prevent rejection between donor and recipient.

The best argument for orientation not being a choice is that
it is SPIRITUALLY determined, not genetic which can be argued as disproven when you look at twin studies.

Nobody can argue if someone BELIEVES SPIRITUALLY
they are male/female homosexual etc. and has a right to that BELIEF.

So that is the best argument I have found to defend someone legally
since BELIEFS are an inherent right and don't require scientific proof.

If you try to use genetics, the studies are opposed showing a slightly higher than 50% correlation
rate of identical twins being the same orientation. If it was genetic, the findings should be 100%.
Since they are higher than 50, this shows that social environment or other factors influence
orientation; SO IT IS MORE LIKE A CHOICE OF RELIGION and not a genetic trait like race!

"Sexual orientation is not genetically fixed like race."

Neither is religion.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

How is it not discrimination to tell someone "your religion is not relevant, serve that person?"


That of course can't be answered.

Religion is not business. Business is business.

You do realize Chik-fil-et is closed on Sunday due to their religious belief, right? And no matter how loudly an aethist screams they are being discriminated against by the owners by refusing to open up and feed him on a Sunday, NO ONE is going to force them to go against their faith by forcing them to open on Sunday.

Religion does effect business practices.

This is about control and power. 'Religious freedom' is a roadblock to what liberals want. They have to control ot and have the power to dictate demands on those whose religious freedom is protected by the Constitution. They must impose their will on them.

Funny how liberals are not doing the same with Muslims...who know would cut their heads off, etc if they tried.

Sadly easyt65 the religious argument is the best way to defend LGBT and transgender expression
as an equal choice, because it wouldn't have to be proven scientifically to be protected by law.

The problem is they'd have to take responsibility for their beliefs, the same way they ask of Christians.
To keep these in private, and if you want to express them in public, it can't be forced on people through govt.
But has to be FREELY CHOSEN and agreed to voluntarily, since it is faith-based.
the First Amendment clause on religious beliefs goes both ways, neither endorsing nor prohibiting by govt.

Sadly , the retards on the left somehow believe the first amendment protected them FROM religion. This is an example of that. I'm gay and I don't have to put up with a Christian not accepting that"

In your view, should someone be allowed to operate a business that refuses to cater to Christians?

Of course. I advocate the same rights for EVERYONE. NO ONE should be refused their right to work only for those people they wish to work for. PERIOD.

AND just so it is clear, I believe that the law DEMANDS that governments and their employees serve EVERYONE. That is completely different than private business.

 

[Skull Pilot]

If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion

You're right. It is no different. And just as the bacon store is under no obligation to accommodate the religious preferences of the Muslim applicant, bakers should be under no obligation to accommodate the sexual preferences of potential customers.

Actually you are wrong on both counts

The first instance is employment law- and employers are obligated to make reasonable accommodations to an employee for religious purposes- so if a butcher shop could make a reasonable accommodation- and still get the job done- it would have to accommodate a Jewish or Muslim who didn't want to handle pork.

The second instance is public accommodation laws- and bakers have an obligation to sell their cakes to customers regardless of their race, religion, gender and in some places- sexual orientation.

Public Accommodation laws have been in place for 50 years no- nothing is new about them.

Why would a Muslim even apply for a job at the store that sells beer and bacon?

Why would anyone who says obeying public accommodation laws is a sin open a business that has to abide by those very same sinful laws?

 

[IsaacNewton]

"I'm a doctor who's Christian, and I don't believe I should have to render healing services to anyone who calls themself a witch. It is against my religion."

Derps, render unto Caesar. I'm pretty sure Jesus himself said that. And I know, kristians in America don't actually read, listen to or follow Jesus, but you at least have to make some fake gesture that you do.

Hi IsaacNewton now HERE's a case that CAN likely be proven scientifically with the right technology.
It is argued that witchcraft/occult and DARK energy CLASHES with the positive spiritual healing energy.
And that this causes hazards to the people involved, similar to mixing AC with DC power that short circuits.

YES if people who are atheist and wicca can refuse to mix with Christians,
to avoid personal conflicts, they have that right due to irreconcileable beliefs that otherwise disrupt the peace.

Just like you have the right to divorce if you and your Scientology spouse can't agree how to raise the kids.

Beliefs are protected for individuals and cannot be mandated or penalized by govt.
If you are somehow abusing your beliefs to violate the rights of others, it is the violation not the belief that is illegal.

And likewise, neither can a correction or law be enforced that goes too far the other way,
and violates the beliefs of the other side either.

You can't impose punishment or correction that is so biased it violates rights and the same law being enforced.

In this case, the laws against discrimination also include CREED.
So by treating both sides equally as CREEDS, the laws and enforcement
must accommodate both sides in proposing a correction or solution.

A solution isn't one if it creates the equal and opposite problem, as with these cases going too far!

I'm a Christian paramedic and when I came on scene the person identified themself as Wiccan. Well it's against my religion so I provided no aid and they died.

And by the way, I'm pro-life.


DERRRRRPPPPPS.

Being a paramedic you obligate yourself to serve the public at large. An artist provides personal services and no I will not provide services for just any ole' one who comes along.

I know, you can parse anything and have a deflect for anything. This is what kristians do.

 

[emilynghiem]

Religion isn't a free ticket to anything. It has nothing to do with the issue. Freedom of conscience is far more fundamental.

If you claim that your religion entitles you to disobey a law without penalty, that's claiming a free ticket.

Dear NYcarbineer the LGBT beliefs are also a creed.
That does not give advocates of those beliefs the right to penalize people of other creeds.

CREED is protected from discrimination.
Why can't you treat both equally as creeds, regardless which one you hold?

If you are Muslim, and a Muslim is pushing the anti-pork belief
on a Hindu business that is selling pork but not beef, suing them to substitute beef in an enchilada instead of pork, does this give you the right to violate the beliefs of the Hindu because
you and the other Muslims are pushing a case that favors YOUR beliefs?

Where is the equal protection in that?

I don't have to agree with LGBT, Christians or Muslims to defend rights to their beliefs from infringement discrimination disparagement or penalty by govt.
Do you have to agree with Christians before you will enforce laws defending their beliefs?

No, their beliefs are not creeds, they are sexual orientations, and therefore none of your or anybody else's business.

creed
krēd/
noun

1. 
   
   
   • a system of Christian or other religious belief; a faith.

Sexual orientation is not genetically fixed like race.

How someone expresses their inner beliefs and identity is on the same level of
CREED, like how someone expresses their Muslim Christian or Buddhist cultural IDENTITY.

NoTeaPartyPleez NYcarbineer there are many stories out there, cases of people coming out straight gay transgender
poly, etc.

Can you show me one person who started out as one ethnicity or race,
and through spiritual healing or change of lifestyle, became a different race?

Their genetics remains scientifically based on birth parents and what they inherited.
This is so specific, even the bone marrow donation programs target 4 minority groups
to save lives by finding matches that depend on ethnicity race even nationality matching:
African, Latino, Asian and Native American. This is SCIENCE based, down to 10 areas
that have to match in order for the HLA compatibility to prevent rejection between donor and recipient.

The best argument for orientation not being a choice is that
it is SPIRITUALLY determined, not genetic which can be argued as disproven when you look at twin studies.

Nobody can argue if someone BELIEVES SPIRITUALLY
they are male/female homosexual etc. and has a right to that BELIEF.

So that is the best argument I have found to defend someone legally
since BELIEFS are an inherent right and don't require scientific proof.

If you try to use genetics, the studies are opposed showing a slightly higher than 50% correlation
rate of identical twins being the same orientation. If it was genetic, the findings should be 100%.
Since they are higher than 50, this shows that social environment or other factors influence
orientation; SO IT IS MORE LIKE A CHOICE OF RELIGION and not a genetic trait like race!

"Sexual orientation is not genetically fixed like race."

Neither is religion.

EXACTLY NoTeaPartyPleez
That is why these both fall under CREEDS.

They can be equal in this category, both as not proven by science or genetics,
and both equally protected by law from infringement or discrimination.

AGREED! Treat them both as CREEDS!

 

[Fair&Balanced]

If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion

You're right. It is no different. And just as the bacon store is under no obligation to accommodate the religious preferences of the Muslim applicant, bakers should be under no obligation to accommodate the sexual preferences of potential customers.

Actually you are wrong on both counts

The first instance is employment law- and employers are obligated to make reasonable accommodations to an employee for religious purposes- so if a butcher shop could make a reasonable accommodation- and still get the job done- it would have to accommodate a Jewish or Muslim who didn't want to handle pork.

The second instance is public accommodation laws- and bakers have an obligation to sell their cakes to customers regardless of their race, religion, gender and in some places- sexual orientation.

Public Accommodation laws have been in place for 50 years no- nothing is new about them.

Why would a Muslim even apply for a job at the store that sells beer and bacon?

Why would anyone who says obeying public accommodation laws is a sin open a business that has to abide by those very same sinful laws?

Because in this fucking country we don't allow the government curtail our rights (and we have a right to be self employed) based on our religious views. MORON

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

I'll say it again, Obama's America really seems to be working out well when people have the time to worry about such stupid and irrelevant issues concerning another person's sexuality.

Righties, get the fuck out of everybody's bedroom and pay attention: Trump is destroying your party while you dither over lesbians ordering a wedding cake.

Don't stuff your bedroom in anyone's face and you won't have a problem.

Who is stuffing their bedroom in your face?

 

[RodISHI]

"I'm a doctor who's Christian, and I don't believe I should have to render healing services to anyone who calls themself a witch. It is against my religion."

Derps, render unto Caesar. I'm pretty sure Jesus himself said that. And I know, kristians in America don't actually read, listen to or follow Jesus, but you at least have to make some fake gesture that you do.

Hi IsaacNewton now HERE's a case that CAN likely be proven scientifically with the right technology.
It is argued that witchcraft/occult and DARK energy CLASHES with the positive spiritual healing energy.
And that this causes hazards to the people involved, similar to mixing AC with DC power that short circuits.

YES if people who are atheist and wicca can refuse to mix with Christians,
to avoid personal conflicts, they have that right due to irreconcileable beliefs that otherwise disrupt the peace.

Just like you have the right to divorce if you and your Scientology spouse can't agree how to raise the kids.

Beliefs are protected for individuals and cannot be mandated or penalized by govt.
If you are somehow abusing your beliefs to violate the rights of others, it is the violation not the belief that is illegal.

And likewise, neither can a correction or law be enforced that goes too far the other way,
and violates the beliefs of the other side either.

You can't impose punishment or correction that is so biased it violates rights and the same law being enforced.

In this case, the laws against discrimination also include CREED.
So by treating both sides equally as CREEDS, the laws and enforcement
must accommodate both sides in proposing a correction or solution.

A solution isn't one if it creates the equal and opposite problem, as with these cases going too far!

I'm a Christian paramedic and when I came on scene the person identified themself as Wiccan. Well it's against my religion so I provided no aid and they died.

And by the way, I'm pro-life.


DERRRRRPPPPPS.

Being a paramedic you obligate yourself to serve the public at large. An artist provides personal services and no I will not provide services for just any ole' one who comes along.

I know, you can parse anything and have a deflect for anything. This is what kristians do.

I know how hateful you are but it does not change the facts.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Gays can refuse straight members from joining gay organizations and from being President of gay clubs, which is considered double standard.

No- private organizations can restrict membership as they wish.

For instance the Catholic Church will not allow women to be priests.

You could have your own 'Bitter Straight Dudes' organization and deny membership to anyone you wanted to- even if its because you thought their wrist was a little to limp.

Gay dating sites refuse service to accommodate straight couples.

No they don't a straight person can put a profile on a gay dating site he or she will just not get any dates

But then again why would a straight person spend money to join a gay dating service
Why would a Muslim apply for a job at the bacon store?
Why would a Christian open a business if the public accommodation laws are considered sinful?

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

If you claim that your religion entitles you to disobey a law without penalty, that's claiming a free ticket.

Dear NYcarbineer the LGBT beliefs are also a creed.
That does not give advocates of those beliefs the right to penalize people of other creeds.

CREED is protected from discrimination.
Why can't you treat both equally as creeds, regardless which one you hold?

If you are Muslim, and a Muslim is pushing the anti-pork belief
on a Hindu business that is selling pork but not beef, suing them to substitute beef in an enchilada instead of pork, does this give you the right to violate the beliefs of the Hindu because
you and the other Muslims are pushing a case that favors YOUR beliefs?

Where is the equal protection in that?

I don't have to agree with LGBT, Christians or Muslims to defend rights to their beliefs from infringement discrimination disparagement or penalty by govt.
Do you have to agree with Christians before you will enforce laws defending their beliefs?

No, their beliefs are not creeds, they are sexual orientations, and therefore none of your or anybody else's business.

creed
krēd/
noun

1. 
   
   
   • a system of Christian or other religious belief; a faith.

Sexual orientation is not genetically fixed like race.

How someone expresses their inner beliefs and identity is on the same level of
CREED, like how someone expresses their Muslim Christian or Buddhist cultural IDENTITY.

NoTeaPartyPleez NYcarbineer there are many stories out there, cases of people coming out straight gay transgender
poly, etc.

Can you show me one person who started out as one ethnicity or race,
and through spiritual healing or change of lifestyle, became a different race?

Their genetics remains scientifically based on birth parents and what they inherited.
This is so specific, even the bone marrow donation programs target 4 minority groups
to save lives by finding matches that depend on ethnicity race even nationality matching:
African, Latino, Asian and Native American. This is SCIENCE based, down to 10 areas
that have to match in order for the HLA compatibility to prevent rejection between donor and recipient.

The best argument for orientation not being a choice is that
it is SPIRITUALLY determined, not genetic which can be argued as disproven when you look at twin studies.

Nobody can argue if someone BELIEVES SPIRITUALLY
they are male/female homosexual etc. and has a right to that BELIEF.

So that is the best argument I have found to defend someone legally
since BELIEFS are an inherent right and don't require scientific proof.

If you try to use genetics, the studies are opposed showing a slightly higher than 50% correlation
rate of identical twins being the same orientation. If it was genetic, the findings should be 100%.
Since they are higher than 50, this shows that social environment or other factors influence
orientation; SO IT IS MORE LIKE A CHOICE OF RELIGION and not a genetic trait like race!

"Sexual orientation is not genetically fixed like race."

Neither is religion.

EXACTLY NoTeaPartyPleez
That is why these both fall under CREEDS.

They can be equal in this category, both as not proven by science or genetics,
and both equally protected by law from infringement or discrimination.

AGREED! Treat them both as CREEDS!

Thanks, but I'll go with the Merriam-Webster definition instead of a right wing paranoiac, OK?

 

[emilynghiem]

Why would a Muslim even apply for a job at the store that sells beer and bacon?

Why would anyone who says obeying public accommodation laws is a sin open a business that has to abide by those very same sinful laws?

Thank you, Skull Pilot
People ARE asking why don't gay couples go to a gay-friendly bakery where
the owners BELIEVE in supporting the LGBT community there!
There are SO MANY LGBT that WANT and deserve that business.

Why insist on trying to impose on a business that isn't compatible.
EXACTLY now you have it.

Take the same issue of choice of employees
seeking employment and apply that to choice of customers seeking a business.

 

[Skull Pilot]

If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion

I completely disagree. The Constitution protects my religious freedom. If you are a LGBT and want some artwork done, your desire for that artwork does not supersede my religious freedom. I do not impose my religious beliefs on you, and you do not try to force me to do something that violates my religious beliefs.

"I reserve the right to NOT provide a service." This actually was once an acceptable sign / practice for businesses, but Liberals seek to impose their will on others, IMO. It isn't just about getting LGBT 'accepted' as a norm, but they are also trying to FORCE others to 'participate in/support it', even if it is against their religious beliefs that are protected UN-CONDITIONALLY under the Constitution.

There are other artists who would gladly take your business. There are other bakeries that would gladly take your business. But that's not good enough. 'THAT' one refuses to do so, so we MUST FORCE them to do so against their will. While 'I' may not want to support your lifestyle / choices due to 'my' religious beliefs 'I' respect your right to be a LGBT and to have rights, 'you' demonstrate 'you' have no respect for 'my' religious beliefs and Constitutional Rights.

'Evil' (as I define in this saying as someone who wants to impose their will on others) teaches 'tolerance' until they are in a position to oppress, silence, and eliminate any opposition to their beliefs."
- We are seeing that today more and more. This oppression of Constitutionally protected rights of religious freedom, to me, is an example of that.

I also believe you and I may disagree on this issue, and that is ok....

You have freedom of religion, not freedom of business.

That's the crux of the problem, the notion that the freedom to conduct business isn't every bit as important as the freedom to practice religion.

Congress shall make no laws respecting religion therefore ALL businesses must obey public accommodation laws

 

[RodISHI]

I'll say it again, Obama's America really seems to be working out well when people have the time to worry about such stupid and irrelevant issues concerning another person's sexuality.

Righties, get the fuck out of everybody's bedroom and pay attention: Trump is destroying your party while you dither over lesbians ordering a wedding cake.

Don't stuff your bedroom in anyone's face and you won't have a problem.

Who is stuffing their bedroom in your face?

When you put something out for public discussion that is what you are doing. If you came and asked me to do artwork for you celebrating your personal choices and I tell you no I am not willing to paint that leave it be and go find someone willing to do what you want.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why would a Muslim even apply for a job at the store that sells beer and bacon?

Why would anyone who says obeying public accommodation laws is a sin open a business that has to abide by those very same sinful laws?

Thank you, Skull Pilot
People ARE asking why don't gay couples go to a gay-friendly bakery where
the owners BELIEVE in supporting the LGBT community there!
There are SO MANY LGBT that WANT and deserve that business.

Why insist on trying to impose on a business that isn't compatible.
EXACTLY now you have it.

Take the same issue of choice of employees
seeking employment and apply that to choice of customers seeking a business.

And why don't blacks go to the black diner? Or the black cinema? Or the black school?

 

[Silhouette]

^^ Race has nothing to do with sexual behaviors. I'll never tire of reminding you of this legal fact.


From the OP link:

So, rather than wait until they decline a couple’s wedding request and land themselves in the headlines and potentially facing fines, the duo have decided that taking the issue to the courts is the best course of action.....Their effort, known as a “pre-enforcement challenge,” wages pushback to a law before it has been enforced against them.....“Joanna and Breanna are exposing the pre-existing tension between Phoenix’s law and their constitutionally protected freedoms, between the right to speak and create freely and the government’s attempt to crush dissent and command conformity,” Scruggs continued. “And that is precisely what’s at stake.”

So what they're doing is saying they don't have to promote ideas or behaviors that are antithetical to their religious beliefs. I believe the SCOTUS will take this case up and find in their favor.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Gays can refuse straight members from joining gay organizations and from being President of gay clubs, which is considered double standard.

No- private organizations can restrict membership as they wish.

For instance the Catholic Church will not allow women to be priests.

You could have your own 'Bitter Straight Dudes' organization and deny membership to anyone you wanted to- even if its because you thought their wrist was a little to limp.

Gay dating sites refuse service to accommodate straight couples.

No they don't a straight person can put a profile on a gay dating site he or she will just not get any dates

But then again why would a straight person spend money to join a gay dating service
Why would a Muslim apply for a job at the bacon store?
Why would a Christian open a business if the public accommodation laws are considered sinful?

A straight person wouldn't spend money to join a gay dating site. A gay person likely would spend money to join a straight dating site though just so they could complain and sue over discrimination.

Same with a Muslim at a bacon store.

A Christian would open his own business for the same reason everyone else who does does, for the freedom of working for ones self.

I get it you fucking idiot, you hate Christians. Sorry you were an alter boy in your previous life and are ashamed that you enjoyed the attention the priest gave you , but that doesn't give you license to take away the rights of Christians.

 

[dblack]

If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion

I completely disagree. The Constitution protects my religious freedom. If you are a LGBT and want some artwork done, your desire for that artwork does not supersede my religious freedom. I do not impose my religious beliefs on you, and you do not try to force me to do something that violates my religious beliefs.

"I reserve the right to NOT provide a service." This actually was once an acceptable sign / practice for businesses, but Liberals seek to impose their will on others, IMO. It isn't just about getting LGBT 'accepted' as a norm, but they are also trying to FORCE others to 'participate in/support it', even if it is against their religious beliefs that are protected UN-CONDITIONALLY under the Constitution.

There are other artists who would gladly take your business. There are other bakeries that would gladly take your business. But that's not good enough. 'THAT' one refuses to do so, so we MUST FORCE them to do so against their will. While 'I' may not want to support your lifestyle / choices due to 'my' religious beliefs 'I' respect your right to be a LGBT and to have rights, 'you' demonstrate 'you' have no respect for 'my' religious beliefs and Constitutional Rights.

'Evil' (as I define in this saying as someone who wants to impose their will on others) teaches 'tolerance' until they are in a position to oppress, silence, and eliminate any opposition to their beliefs."
- We are seeing that today more and more. This oppression of Constitutionally protected rights of religious freedom, to me, is an example of that.

I also believe you and I may disagree on this issue, and that is ok....

You have freedom of religion, not freedom of business.

That's the crux of the problem, the notion that the freedom to conduct business isn't every bit as important as the freedom to practice religion.

Congress shall make no laws respecting religion therefore ALL businesses must obey public accommodation laws

Agreed. I'm not arguing for a religious exemption. I think that would be worse. I'm arguing that these laws are fundamentally in opposition to personal freedom.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Why would a Muslim even apply for a job at the store that sells beer and bacon?

Why would anyone who says obeying public accommodation laws is a sin open a business that has to abide by those very same sinful laws?

Thank you, Skull Pilot
People ARE asking why don't gay couples go to a gay-friendly bakery where
the owners BELIEVE in supporting the LGBT community there!
There are SO MANY LGBT that WANT and deserve that business.

Why insist on trying to impose on a business that isn't compatible.
EXACTLY now you have it.

Take the same issue of choice of employees
seeking employment and apply that to choice of customers seeking a business.

And why don't blacks go to the black diner? Or the black cinema? Or the black school?

Many of them do.


But that wasn't the point.


There are TONS of choices out there on where to do business. Go do business with someone who wants your money rather than using the government to force someone who does NOT want your money to take it. How hard is that?

 

[NYcarbineer]

If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion

there is a difference between a person who agrees to be an EMPLOYEE but refuses to
do what he has been employed to do---and
a person selling his own services. The artists are not the PAID EMPLOYEES of the people who hire their services until they agree to
DO THE SERVICE. Your analogy is silly

No there is not.

If you want to open a business you MUST abide by public accommodation laws. If your religion does not allow you to abide by those laws then you should not run a business because the mere legal operation of that business violates whatever superstition you happen to live by so the very act of opening that business is a sin

Dear Skull Pilot
So if a bacon business cannot hire or serve a Muslim customer, because
they will not change to selling beef or turkey bacon instead of pork only,
then the Muslim customer can sue this business for not accommodating them?
Or the bacon seller should shut down their business
because they can't accommodate Muslims?

What (legal) products you sell are your business. Who you will or will not sell to is the government's business.

 

[Silhouette]

Two more "Christians", breaking the law.

The laws of Jesusland are not the same as the laws of the USA. Just for starters, our law is not an eye for an eye either.

Except like men trying to use the women's showers, your cult is going to lose this one too pal.