Evangelicals explain their support for Trump. It's the racism that stands out.

[rightwinger]

Show us a Muslim nation that is invading others

Wow. Already moving the goal posts.


They expanded by the sword and fire until they were stopped in all directions.

That they are not currently launching formal wars of aggression right now, is because they have been getting their asses kicked for quite some time, not a change to peace and love.


Dumbass.

FAIL

You claim Muslims are warlike. We have many, many Muslim nation’s
Show where they went to war to spread Islam. If it is in the Koran, they will not care about the consequences

Sure they would. Being warlike and being suicidal do not go hand in hand.

I asked, what countries have been invaded by Muslims
You mocked....Are you serious?

I am still waiting for a reply. The far right constantly claims Islam is a religion of war

I asked you a simple question.....show me

There are six Islamic States and dozens more that are Muslim majority

Show where they are waging war on non Muslim states

Why the qualifier? If a muslim state wars against a muslim state it is still war, thus undermining the claim to be a religion of peace.

Show us a Muslim nation that is invading others

Wow. Already moving the goal posts.


They expanded by the sword and fire until they were stopped in all directions.

That they are not currently launching formal wars of aggression right now, is because they have been getting their asses kicked for quite some time, not a change to peace and love.


Dumbass.

FAIL

You claim Muslims are warlike. We have many, many Muslim nation’s
Show where they went to war to spread Islam. If it is in the Koran, they will not care about the consequences

Sure they would. Being warlike and being suicidal do not go hand in hand.

I asked, what countries have been invaded by Muslims
You mocked....Are you serious?

I am still waiting for a reply. The far right constantly claims Islam is a religion of war

I asked you a simple question.....show me

There are six Islamic States and dozens more that are Muslim majority

Show where they are waging war on non Muslim states

Why the qualifier? If a muslim state wars against a muslim state it is still war, thus undermining the claim to be a religion of peace.

FAIL

You claim Muslims are waging war to spread their religion
Yet you can’t point out any examples where they did it

 

[rightwinger]

The market did not handle it on its own. In practice, Jim Crow America conspired to refuse service to blacks

Same thing is happening with Gay Marriage. They lost the issue in the courts and now are conspiring to prevent service to gay marriage

It does not just apply to cakes. It applies to photography, limos, receiption halls, music, invitations, hotels

The market before and during the 60's and the market today are two different things.

For contracted services, why is this an issue?

Why should people be forced to endorse a ceremony they don't believe in?

Progressives don't just have to win, they have to crush their opponents and ruin them. What a fucking bunch of pathetic losers you are.

For blacks, the market has changed. Nobody would dream of denying service to blacks...even if they could.

But that market, in some communities, is turning against gay marriage

They are fine if you have to go to another community to get married. Block access to hotels, banquet halls, florists, musicians...even bakers

Your kind is not wanted around here....look elsewhere

If an entire community decided to not participate, THEN I can see an issue with regards to commerce and then forcing them to provide it.

That is the way Jim Crow worked.....the entire community enforced the peculiar institution

Now, what if the community of Buttfuk Kentucky decided they didn’t want no gays getting married in their town? Any photographer, florist, baker or wedding venue that provided a service to gays would be black balled.

Just like they did under Jim Crow

Then the courts can force said community to follow a Consent Decree because they all colluded to deny a service as a blanket denial, not as individual choices.

They will all wrap themselves in the Bible and claim their religion forbids supporting gay wedcings. Conservative packed courts will agree

 

[bodecea]

Show us a Muslim nation that is invading others

Wow. Already moving the goal posts.


They expanded by the sword and fire until they were stopped in all directions.

That they are not currently launching formal wars of aggression right now, is because they have been getting their asses kicked for quite some time, not a change to peace and love.


Dumbass.

FAIL

You claim Muslims are warlike. We have many, many Muslim nation’s
Show where they went to war to spread Islam. If it is in the Koran, they will not care about the consequences

Sure they would. Being warlike and being suicidal do not go hand in hand.

I asked, what countries have been invaded by Muslims
You mocked....Are you serious?

I am still waiting for a reply. The far right constantly claims Islam is a religion of war

I asked you a simple question.....show me

There are six Islamic States and dozens more that are Muslim majority

Show where they are waging war on non Muslim states

Why the qualifier? If a muslim state wars against a muslim state it is still war, thus undermining the claim to be a religion of peace.

Why the qualifier? If a christian state wars against a christian state it is still war, thus undermining the claim to be a religion of peace.

 

[Correll]

Wow. Already moving the goal posts.


They expanded by the sword and fire until they were stopped in all directions.

That they are not currently launching formal wars of aggression right now, is because they have been getting their asses kicked for quite some time, not a change to peace and love.


Dumbass.

FAIL

You claim Muslims are warlike. We have many, many Muslim nation’s
Show where they went to war to spread Islam. If it is in the Koran, they will not care about the consequences

Sure they would. Being warlike and being suicidal do not go hand in hand.

I asked, what countries have been invaded by Muslims
You mocked....Are you serious?

I am still waiting for a reply. The far right constantly claims Islam is a religion of war

I asked you a simple question.....show me

There are six Islamic States and dozens more that are Muslim majority

Show where they are waging war on non Muslim states

Why the qualifier? If a muslim state wars against a muslim state it is still war, thus undermining the claim to be a religion of peace.

Wow. Already moving the goal posts.


They expanded by the sword and fire until they were stopped in all directions.

That they are not currently launching formal wars of aggression right now, is because they have been getting their asses kicked for quite some time, not a change to peace and love.


Dumbass.

FAIL

You claim Muslims are warlike. We have many, many Muslim nation’s
Show where they went to war to spread Islam. If it is in the Koran, they will not care about the consequences

Sure they would. Being warlike and being suicidal do not go hand in hand.

I asked, what countries have been invaded by Muslims
You mocked....Are you serious?

I am still waiting for a reply. The far right constantly claims Islam is a religion of war

I asked you a simple question.....show me

There are six Islamic States and dozens more that are Muslim majority

Show where they are waging war on non Muslim states

Why the qualifier? If a muslim state wars against a muslim state it is still war, thus undermining the claim to be a religion of peace.

FAIL

You claim Muslims are waging war to spread their religion
Yet you can’t point out any examples where they did it

No, I ridiculed the idea that they are a Religion of Peace and commented on how they HAD spread their religion by sword and fire.


I've seen this with you before, an inability to understand the concept of time.


Pull yourself together and don't waste my time, with stupid fucking games.

 

[martybegan]

The market before and during the 60's and the market today are two different things.

For contracted services, why is this an issue?

Why should people be forced to endorse a ceremony they don't believe in?

Progressives don't just have to win, they have to crush their opponents and ruin them. What a fucking bunch of pathetic losers you are.

For blacks, the market has changed. Nobody would dream of denying service to blacks...even if they could.

But that market, in some communities, is turning against gay marriage

They are fine if you have to go to another community to get married. Block access to hotels, banquet halls, florists, musicians...even bakers

Your kind is not wanted around here....look elsewhere

If an entire community decided to not participate, THEN I can see an issue with regards to commerce and then forcing them to provide it.

That is the way Jim Crow worked.....the entire community enforced the peculiar institution

Now, what if the community of Buttfuk Kentucky decided they didn’t want no gays getting married in their town? Any photographer, florist, baker or wedding venue that provided a service to gays would be black balled.

Just like they did under Jim Crow

Then the courts can force said community to follow a Consent Decree because they all colluded to deny a service as a blanket denial, not as individual choices.

They will all wrap themselves in the Bible and claim their religion forbids supporting gay wedcings. Conservative packed courts will agree

The thing is that a whole community doing so would then become something the government would be concerned about, because it would actually be interfering with commerce. Not individual transactions, but commerce as a whole.

If a whole community pulled something like that off, my support would then shift to the same sex couple.

 

[Correll]

Wow. Already moving the goal posts.


They expanded by the sword and fire until they were stopped in all directions.

That they are not currently launching formal wars of aggression right now, is because they have been getting their asses kicked for quite some time, not a change to peace and love.


Dumbass.

FAIL

You claim Muslims are warlike. We have many, many Muslim nation’s
Show where they went to war to spread Islam. If it is in the Koran, they will not care about the consequences

Sure they would. Being warlike and being suicidal do not go hand in hand.

I asked, what countries have been invaded by Muslims
You mocked....Are you serious?

I am still waiting for a reply. The far right constantly claims Islam is a religion of war

I asked you a simple question.....show me

There are six Islamic States and dozens more that are Muslim majority

Show where they are waging war on non Muslim states

Why the qualifier? If a muslim state wars against a muslim state it is still war, thus undermining the claim to be a religion of peace.

Why the qualifier? If a christian state wars against a christian state it is still war, thus undermining the claim to be a religion of peace.

Thank you for agreeing.

 

[rightwinger]

FAIL

You claim Muslims are warlike. We have many, many Muslim nation’s
Show where they went to war to spread Islam. If it is in the Koran, they will not care about the consequences

Sure they would. Being warlike and being suicidal do not go hand in hand.

I asked, what countries have been invaded by Muslims
You mocked....Are you serious?

I am still waiting for a reply. The far right constantly claims Islam is a religion of war

I asked you a simple question.....show me

There are six Islamic States and dozens more that are Muslim majority

Show where they are waging war on non Muslim states

Why the qualifier? If a muslim state wars against a muslim state it is still war, thus undermining the claim to be a religion of peace.

FAIL

You claim Muslims are warlike. We have many, many Muslim nation’s
Show where they went to war to spread Islam. If it is in the Koran, they will not care about the consequences

Sure they would. Being warlike and being suicidal do not go hand in hand.

I asked, what countries have been invaded by Muslims
You mocked....Are you serious?

I am still waiting for a reply. The far right constantly claims Islam is a religion of war

I asked you a simple question.....show me

There are six Islamic States and dozens more that are Muslim majority

Show where they are waging war on non Muslim states

Why the qualifier? If a muslim state wars against a muslim state it is still war, thus undermining the claim to be a religion of peace.

FAIL

You claim Muslims are waging war to spread their religion
Yet you can’t point out any examples where they did it

No, I ridiculed the idea that they are a Religion of Peace and commented on how they HAD spread their religion by sword and fire.


I've seen this with you before, an inability to understand the concept of time.


Pull yourself together and don't waste my time, with stupid fucking games.

FAIL

Show us something recent to back your claim

 

[rightwinger]

For blacks, the market has changed. Nobody would dream of denying service to blacks...even if they could.

But that market, in some communities, is turning against gay marriage

They are fine if you have to go to another community to get married. Block access to hotels, banquet halls, florists, musicians...even bakers

Your kind is not wanted around here....look elsewhere

If an entire community decided to not participate, THEN I can see an issue with regards to commerce and then forcing them to provide it.

That is the way Jim Crow worked.....the entire community enforced the peculiar institution

Now, what if the community of Buttfuk Kentucky decided they didn’t want no gays getting married in their town? Any photographer, florist, baker or wedding venue that provided a service to gays would be black balled.

Just like they did under Jim Crow

Then the courts can force said community to follow a Consent Decree because they all colluded to deny a service as a blanket denial, not as individual choices.

They will all wrap themselves in the Bible and claim their religion forbids supporting gay wedcings. Conservative packed courts will agree

The thing is that a whole community doing so would then become something the government would be concerned about, because it would actually be interfering with commerce. Not individual transactions, but commerce as a whole.

If a whole community pulled something like that off, my support would then shift to the same sex couple.

And I’m saying the conservative packed courts would support their right to do so on religious grounds....regardless of how shallow

 

[martybegan]

If an entire community decided to not participate, THEN I can see an issue with regards to commerce and then forcing them to provide it.

That is the way Jim Crow worked.....the entire community enforced the peculiar institution

Now, what if the community of Buttfuk Kentucky decided they didn’t want no gays getting married in their town? Any photographer, florist, baker or wedding venue that provided a service to gays would be black balled.

Just like they did under Jim Crow

Then the courts can force said community to follow a Consent Decree because they all colluded to deny a service as a blanket denial, not as individual choices.

They will all wrap themselves in the Bible and claim their religion forbids supporting gay wedcings. Conservative packed courts will agree

The thing is that a whole community doing so would then become something the government would be concerned about, because it would actually be interfering with commerce. Not individual transactions, but commerce as a whole.

If a whole community pulled something like that off, my support would then shift to the same sex couple.

And I’m saying the conservative packed courts would support their right to do so on religious grounds....regardless of how shallow

I don't think so. A whole community colluding to interfere with commerce would be a tough sell to strict constructionists. When a community as a whole decides to take similar action, what you get is an end run around making a law to achieve the desired effect. THEN equal protection would also come into play, in addition to commerce.

 

[Votto]

It's really not this hard.

Either vote for a man whore or someone who wants tax payers to pay for genocide.

 

[Lysistrata]

It's really not this hard.

Either vote for a man whore or someone who wants tax payers to pay for genocide.

Who in the heck ever wanted tax payers to pay for genocide??? Exaggeration. Hyperbole. Once again.

 

[BlackSand]

Not true. The whole "give an inch take a mile" thing is how the progressives justify their overreaching laws.

Good luck with that. Try denying a point of sale item "just because"

Absolutists are the scourge of the earth.

You keep talking about businesses burying themselves when they don't have to ...
Mainly because your ideas require absolutes ...

If you want to run a business that intends to limit the ability for anyone to exercise their freedoms ...
Whether those freedoms are religious or lifestyle ...
Then shut the fuck up when in blows up in your face.

If you, for some stupid reason, feel the need to bring the authorities into the matter ...
Instead of using the market conditions available at your disposal and some common sense ...
To tailor the business you want to conduct, with the clients you want to conduct business with ...
Then suffer with the crumbs of your failures and at the hands of government, the market, or the community.

All I ever said is that business can get along fine without any of the nefarious pleas to government ...
To overcome an obstacle people like you just don't have the wherewithal to better manage on their own.

Inches are given and taken ... When you are stupid enough to leave the directions up to the discretion of someone else.

.​

 

[Circe]

You didn't read the article, did you.

No. Of course you didn't.

I read the three paragraphs...…...there isn't MORE, is there? That was boring enough.

Why don't leftists get it that you aren't really allowed to give us reading assignments on discussion forums?

Discussion forums are for DISCUSSION, not long-winded propaganda.

Not of interest.

 

[Circe]

I did thirty years in the Assembly of God so you can just forget about trying that argument on me.

You make it sound like it was a prison sentence.

Why did the church kick you out? .....

Could have something to do with the expressed atheism....…………………..Just a guess.

 

[Circe]

You don't have to agree with me ... And I don't have to be shady about anything.
I can flat out tell your stupid ass I don't want to do business with you.

The government, the members of Antioch Baptist Church, the Gay Pride Commission, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus ...
None of those motherfuckers have a say-so in whether or not I do business with anyone.

Public Accommodation laws have not worked out well. I entirely agree with all you say. I think customers have a responsibility to behave themselves decently if they want to get to shop or live or rent in a given business. The violent rioting of Black Friday shopping lately has spoiled it for everyone, for instance. Black bad behavior in housing is a real problem. I think some pressure to act normally decent would be of great benefit to the black community as well as to stores. The market could sort out the situation, if free: after all, stores or properties lose customers if they discriminate on any given basis. They may prefer not to if it doesn't cost way too much to cater to bad actors.

There is no reason on Earth why a baker should have to bake a perversion cake if he does not want to: that's just wrong to enslave him that way. And it's just as wrong under the current law for Red Hen staff to all gather and throw out the Sarah Sanders party and then scream and harass them all down the street, as they did: it's okay if leftists do these horrible things but not all right if a conservative politely declines some business? Darn.

 

[BlackSand]

Public Accommodation laws have not worked out well. I entirely agree with all you say. I think customers have a responsibility to behave themselves decently if they want to get to shop or live or rent in a given business. The violent rioting of Black Friday shopping lately has spoiled it for everyone, for instance. Black bad behavior in housing is a real problem. I think some pressure to act normally decent would be of great benefit to the black community as well as to stores. The market could sort out the situation, if free: after all, stores or properties lose customers if they discriminate on any given basis. They may prefer not to if it doesn't cost way too much to cater to bad actors.

There is no reason on Earth why a baker should have to bake a perversion cake if he does not want to: that's just wrong to enslave him that way. And it's just as wrong under the current law for Red Hen staff to all gather and throw out the Sarah Sanders party and then scream and harass them all down the street, as they did: it's okay if leftists do these horrible things but not all right if a conservative politely declines some business? Darn.

Thanks for thinking about things.
And you make some good points about the cost of doing business with certain customers.

Although not specific to race or sexual orientation ...
I had no desire to do business with ghetto thugs, white trash, and crack heads.
So ... I created business standards and conditions that by proxy eliminate those customers.

Therefore ... I don't have to replace equipment destroyed by irresponsible, uneducated asswipes.
I don't have conflict in the work environment that involves people that don't know how to behave and that would disrupt the business I would like to conduct.

I couldn't meet the requirements of the public accommodations laws if I specifically stated who I didn't want to do business with ...
Or why I didn't want to do business with them.

Using the market functions available ...
I can accomplish the atmosphere I want and limit my clientele ...
Without asking anyone's permission and staying within the confines of the laws.

You just have to think ... And figure out effective ways to avoid issues you don't have to address in order to accomplish the same goal.




Even if I made wedding cakes and didn't approve of gay couples ...
And the government effectively forced me to bake them a cake ...
I would send the proceeds from the cake to a Christian Charity ...
Claim the donation as a tax deduction ...
And make the government pay me back out of its pocket for thinking it has a clue about smarter business ...

.​

.​

 

[playtime]

This is exactly why Evangelicals have NO CRITICISM OF THE current President. He has NOT DEFILED the office of PRESIDENT like BILL CLINTON DID. GET IT LIBTARDS or is this just too complicated for you idiots to understand? CLINTON also defiled the Governors mansion too. Stupid speculation about what happened with a tramp porn star PRIOR to the presidency is all you hallucinating desperate HATERS HAVE. Maybe Melania had an open agreement? It is her business NOT YOURS and anything MAY have occurred a long time ago....A LONG TIME AGO and IRRELEVANT to this PRESIDENCY!

Why would an evangelical care if it was done on government properties?

Not that long ago

And given his propensity for lying, we have no idea about his current fidelity
We do know the Third Lady does not share a bed with him

4th lady...

ivana
ivanka
marla
THEN
melania.

 

[playtime]

Religious objection

He claimed Islam is against killing of enemy soldiers? LOL!!!!!!

Yes he did

The US Supreme Court agreed with him

Well, that is stupid on him, and them.

Ali could have easily claimed he had heel spurs

But he risked all for his religious objections

His religious objections were bullshit. HIs racist objections were bullshit.


He openly refused to serve his nation, when called.


He deserved to be fucked.

he didn't shit his pants & got a 4-F like a draft dodging mediocre guitar player/pedophile.

 

[playtime]

They can be silly all they want. Unless their practices create an actual harm (and butt hurt is not harm) the government should leave them the hell alone.

And what exactly has the government done to them that was the result of singling them out from the rest of the public?

{{meta.pageTitle}}

Employment Division v. Smith, in which Justice Scalia wrote for the majority:

Yes. Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, observed that the Court has never held that an individual's religious beliefs excuse him from compliance with an otherwise valid law prohibiting conduct that government is free to regulate. Allowing exceptions to every state law or regulation affecting religion "would open the prospect of constitutionally required exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind." Scalia cited as examples compulsory military service, payment of taxes, vaccination requirements, and child-neglect laws.
​

There is a difference between taxes, military service, child laws and forcing someone to provide a non time sensitive, non-crucial contracted service.

And even Scalia can be wrong sometimes.

And when remedies are made, as in the case of pacifists and military service, they are given other options, such as being a medic, or some other non combat role.

They aren't forced to bear arms against someone else, they are just required to serve. That is the least invasive method of resolving the issue.

"bake or else" is not the least invasive method.

It was extremely hard to get conscientious-objective status during the Vietnam War. A great number of objectors had to flee to Canada. The singer Joan Baez, a Quaker Christian, did jail time for refusing to pay taxes that went to finance the war, as did her husband. I doubt that these current "objectors" would be willing to do jail time. I think that this little cake-baker shit would ever have to guts to go to jail. He just wants to be mollycoddled. He obviously is not ready to make any sacrifice for his religion, much less sacrifice his life. Poor, poor dear.

mohamed ali stood by his convictions & went to jail. he was a bigger man than most 'stand behind the cross' warriors..

So you want to make not baking a cake a crime instead of just a civil violation?

Fascist.

you are an idiot. stfu.

 

[playtime]

It was extremely hard to get conscientious-objective status during the Vietnam War. A great number of objectors had to flee to Canada. The singer Joan Baez, a Quaker Christian, did jail time for refusing to pay taxes that went to finance the war, as did her husband. I doubt that these current "objectors" would be willing to do jail time. I think that this little cake-baker shit would ever have to guts to go to jail. He just wants to be mollycoddled. He obviously is not ready to make any sacrifice for his religion, much less sacrifice his life. Poor, poor dear.

That was for overall, not joining objector. Being a medic was an easier route, and usually even more dangerous. And a lot of people faked objector status in Vietnam as opposed to WWII.

And now your anti-religious bias shows, wow, it only took 4 posts.

And refusing taxes is different then saying "I don't want to fight". Again plenty of medics in WWII were objectors, they still went there and risked their lives.

What "anti-religious bias"? What exaggeration! Do you except all faiths in the world? It sounds like you are likely recruit for the Taliban or ISIS. Perhaps you are some Haredi guy who gets on an El-Al flight and actually expects another passenger to move because he needs to sit his fat butt down and he won't sit next to a woman.

Religion is a choice, and people who choose to adhere to religions that have out-of-the-ordinary restrictions need to make plans for themselves. It is not anyone else's responsibility to take up the slack or take their shit. The rest of the general public have things that they have to get done, too. If you follow such a religion, figure out how to follow it in modern society without involving anyone else.

If you have to equate not baking a cake in one specific situation with ISIS, you lost the argument.

El Al of all airlines should expect this stuff and try to accomodate. If they can't, then the Hasidic guy has the option to get off the plane.

So you basically want Religion to "get back into the fucking closet"?

Interesting.

Who ever said that. Not all religions are the same. Even considering only the Abrahamic faiths, Jews, Christians, and Muslims, are all divided into separate religions according to their differences in beliefs. There is a very large difference between a southern baptist or an assembly of god and an orthodox.
What I'm saying is that it is up to a practitioner of any religion to make plans for dealing with mainstream society. For example, if one is Jewish or Muslim, don't get a job in a meatpacking plant that handles pork. Please don't apply for a job in a meatpacking plant if you are a vegetarian Hindu.The general public is not obligated in any way to cater to anyone of these people or go around them. It's the attempts by some of these groups to shift the burden of their beliefs on to others that is the problem.

I've seen these cases:

• Seventh Day Adventist can't work on Saturday, but accepts a job at a 24/7 manufacturing company. The labor contract goes by seniority in terms of who gets weekends off. No. He doesn't get to skip to the top of the seniority list. Should a co-worker be required to give up Saturday and work in his place? NOT
• Flight attendant converts to Islam and then refuses to serve alcohol on board. At first, her colleagues took over and then got tired of doing it and complained. Now she's suing her employer.
• Jewish woman manages office that closed at six. Then she wants to leave work on Friday in winter in time to make it home to light the Sabbath candles at sundown and complete the prayers that will lead her family into the Sabbath celebration, as it is tradition that the family matriarch does this. NOPE.

The burden falls on the individual. I have lived within blocks of Orthodox Jewish families, who walked to services on Saturdays and hired people to come switch on their lights when they could not and warm their food, cooked the day before. I have lived near an Amish market that was open from Thursdays through Saturdays, where Amish sold their cheeses, meats, jellies, pretzels. They cannot drive motor vehicles that would bring them down to the DC area from Pennsylvania or wherever, so they hired drivers and trucks.

The people you defend want to push their burdens onto others, yet these burdens are of their own choosing.

Why should a person who owns their own business be forced to provide a good or service they don't want to provide? All of your examples are about employers and employees, not a private business wholly owned by a certain persons or person.

In the cases above, the worst thing that happens is the person loses their job. They are not fined for their acts, they are not told they can never work again in a field similar to the one they just got fired from. In the cake cases the government has said either bake a cake for this, or never bake cakes again. And by the way here's a 400k fine for hurting someone's feelings.

What the people I "defend' want to do is not provide one particular type of service, and just that one. They all agree that they can't deny walk in/generic/point of sale items to people just because they are gay. They just don't want to be part of a ceremony they find sinful and against their religion.

This service is non critical, it is not time-sensitive, and it can easily be gotten by another provider. This is not about accommodation by employers as you state above, this is about a person's freedom to engage in commerce and not have to violate their morals. The government can have a say in which cases are valid or not, but based on the 1st amendment and free exercise, they must defer to a person's religious exercise unless a compelling government interest can be found. And even then they must rectify the situation using the least intrusive method possible.

if a public business that enjoys tax breaks because of the taxpayers of the city & state should not have the right to be bigots.