Farmer Prevented from Selling His Crop Because He Supports Traditional Marriage

[Seawytch]

The Right's obsession with protecting an imaginary right to bigotry is one of the best indicators of what the Right really is.

It's really nobody else's business who sells to who, who buys from who... why the fuck do you want to give a shit about such meaningless things? Unless of course you're a control freak?
Anybody else getting sick of the government meddling in personal business? Lol

Our Constitution has made it our business.

Where does the Constitution say one person has to sell to another? I need the specific location.

Federal law says it and the Constitution protects the supremacy of federal law in the Supremacy Clause.

So you can't show me the specific location? Got it. Much like when I've asked for the location of where the Constitution says healthcare, food stamps, etc. you couldn't provide it. The 10th Amendment says things like that belong at the State level yet you big government idiots still want them at the federal level.

42 U.S. Code § 2000a - Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation

PA laws have been challenged and found Constitutional.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

It's really nobody else's business who sells to who, who buys from who... why the fuck do you want to give a shit about such meaningless things? Unless of course you're a control freak?
Anybody else getting sick of the government meddling in personal business? Lol

Our Constitution has made it our business.

Where does the Constitution say one person has to sell to another? I need the specific location.

Federal law says it and the Constitution protects the supremacy of federal law in the Supremacy Clause.

So you can't show me the specific location? Got it. Much like when I've asked for the location of where the Constitution says healthcare, food stamps, etc. you couldn't provide it. The 10th Amendment says things like that belong at the State level yet you big government idiots still want them at the federal level.

42 U.S. Code § 2000a - Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation

PA laws have been challenged and found Constitutional.

Religious freedom brings in an entire new ball game. Hence why SCOTUS agreed to hear the Colorado baker's case.

If the baker wins, your PA laws are worthless

 

[Conservative65]

It's really nobody else's business who sells to who, who buys from who... why the fuck do you want to give a shit about such meaningless things? Unless of course you're a control freak?
Anybody else getting sick of the government meddling in personal business? Lol

Our Constitution has made it our business.

Where does the Constitution say one person has to sell to another? I need the specific location.

Federal law says it and the Constitution protects the supremacy of federal law in the Supremacy Clause.

So you can't show me the specific location? Got it. Much like when I've asked for the location of where the Constitution says healthcare, food stamps, etc. you couldn't provide it. The 10th Amendment says things like that belong at the State level yet you big government idiots still want them at the federal level.

42 U.S. Code § 2000a - Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation

PA laws have been challenged and found Constitutional.

That's in the Constitution?

 

[Conservative65]

Our Constitution has made it our business.

Where does the Constitution say one person has to sell to another? I need the specific location.

Federal law says it and the Constitution protects the supremacy of federal law in the Supremacy Clause.

So you can't show me the specific location? Got it. Much like when I've asked for the location of where the Constitution says healthcare, food stamps, etc. you couldn't provide it. The 10th Amendment says things like that belong at the State level yet you big government idiots still want them at the federal level.

42 U.S. Code § 2000a - Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation

PA laws have been challenged and found Constitutional.

Religious freedom brings in an entire new ball game. Hence why SCOTUS agreed to hear the Colorado baker's case.

If the baker wins, your PA laws are worthless

Aren't those that argue PA laws rank higher on the scale than what's in the Constitution constantly telling us something about a Supremacy Clause?

 

[HappyJoy]

Where does the Constitution say one person has to sell to another? I need the specific location.

Federal law says it and the Constitution protects the supremacy of federal law in the Supremacy Clause.

So you can't show me the specific location? Got it. Much like when I've asked for the location of where the Constitution says healthcare, food stamps, etc. you couldn't provide it. The 10th Amendment says things like that belong at the State level yet you big government idiots still want them at the federal level.

42 U.S. Code § 2000a - Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation

PA laws have been challenged and found Constitutional.

Religious freedom brings in an entire new ball game. Hence why SCOTUS agreed to hear the Colorado baker's case.

If the baker wins, your PA laws are worthless

Aren't those that argue PA laws rank higher on the scale than what's in the Constitution constantly telling us something about a Supremacy Clause?

Nobody is arguing PA laws take precedent over the Constitution. But, you be you.

 

[Conservative65]

Federal law says it and the Constitution protects the supremacy of federal law in the Supremacy Clause.

So you can't show me the specific location? Got it. Much like when I've asked for the location of where the Constitution says healthcare, food stamps, etc. you couldn't provide it. The 10th Amendment says things like that belong at the State level yet you big government idiots still want them at the federal level.

42 U.S. Code § 2000a - Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation

PA laws have been challenged and found Constitutional.

Religious freedom brings in an entire new ball game. Hence why SCOTUS agreed to hear the Colorado baker's case.

If the baker wins, your PA laws are worthless

Aren't those that argue PA laws rank higher on the scale than what's in the Constitution constantly telling us something about a Supremacy Clause?

Nobody is arguing PA laws take precedent over the Constitution. But, you be you.

That's exactly what NYCarbineer did. That's exactly what Seawytch did.

 

[HappyJoy]

So you can't show me the specific location? Got it. Much like when I've asked for the location of where the Constitution says healthcare, food stamps, etc. you couldn't provide it. The 10th Amendment says things like that belong at the State level yet you big government idiots still want them at the federal level.

42 U.S. Code § 2000a - Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation

PA laws have been challenged and found Constitutional.

Religious freedom brings in an entire new ball game. Hence why SCOTUS agreed to hear the Colorado baker's case.

If the baker wins, your PA laws are worthless

Aren't those that argue PA laws rank higher on the scale than what's in the Constitution constantly telling us something about a Supremacy Clause?

Nobody is arguing PA laws take precedent over the Constitution. But, you be you.

That's exactly what NYCarbineer did. That's exactly what Seawytch did.

PA laws are not unconstitutional.

 

[easyt65]

Did you notice the government assholes think Lansing property is their personal property when it in fact belongs to the people. Very typical of government fiefdoms.

EVERYTHING you have is the government's....you only have what you have because they LET you have it...temporarily.

That does seem to be the thing from the left and 'you didn't build anything'. I'm thinking if that is the case we can just seize whatever those who believe that shit has and distribute their goods, wealth, what ever among the middle class and poor they screwed over to get their billions or millions.

'You didn't Build That'
'Christians Are Disqualified From Serving As Judges'
'Refuse to sell a cake, get fined'
' Support Traditional Marriage' - can't make your livelihood / sell your crops

...we must break you
...you must be assimilated
...all opposition to ideas / views / ideology must be wiped out through violence (Antifa)

 

[Conservative65]

42 U.S. Code § 2000a - Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation

PA laws have been challenged and found Constitutional.

Religious freedom brings in an entire new ball game. Hence why SCOTUS agreed to hear the Colorado baker's case.

If the baker wins, your PA laws are worthless

Aren't those that argue PA laws rank higher on the scale than what's in the Constitution constantly telling us something about a Supremacy Clause?

Nobody is arguing PA laws take precedent over the Constitution. But, you be you.

That's exactly what NYCarbineer did. That's exactly what Seawytch did.

PA laws are not unconstitutional.

Anyone that supports them when compared to the 1st Amendment, as in this case, is arguing that laws passed by a legislative body are superior to what the Constitution says.

 

[bodecea]

Oh look...You're deflecting again. Jesus actually mentioned divorce did he not? Jesus himself actually condemned divorce in no uncertain terms, is that not correct? Why are no bakers, florists, photographers, pizza kitchens or farmers refusing to serve divorced people? Jesus never said diddly about gays but "Christians" feel it's their "god given" duty to refuse to serve them....but happily bake wedding cakes for fat couples (gluttony is a deadly sin) and divorcees remarrying. Why the selective enforcement?

Oh look, you're ignoring that Jesus didn't mention your type of marriage and but mentioned my type.

No, I'm acknowledging he said nothing about gays...but he did mention divorce. Why aren't divorced people being denied service by these "good Christians"?

He also mentioned marriage being between a man and a woman. Why do you ignore that?

What's to ignore? It was pretty much the only kind there was over 2,000 years ago. So what? It has nothing to do with the questions posed. Your continued deflection is noted.

Things you don't like that the Bible addresses. It has to do with you claiming things the Bible says then ignoring it when you don't like. Jesus didn't mention your kind of marriage. Tell me He didn't think it was a valid kind either.

Jesus didn't mention interracial marriage either.....Tell me he didn't think it was a valid kind either.

 

[bodecea]

Did you notice the government assholes think Lansing property is their personal property when it in fact belongs to the people. Very typical of government fiefdoms.

EVERYTHING you have is the government's....you only have what you have because they LET you have it...temporarily.

That does seem to be the thing from the left and 'you didn't build anything'. I'm thinking if that is the case we can just seize whatever those who believe that shit has and distribute their goods, wealth, what ever among the middle class and poor they screwed over to get their billions or millions.

'You didn't Build That'
'Christians Are Disqualified From Serving As Judges'
'Refuse to sell a cake, get fined'
' Support Traditional Marriage' - can't make your livelihood / sell your crops

...we must break you
...you must be assimilated
...all opposition to ideas / views / ideology must be wiped out through violence (Antifa)

Who said christians are disqualified as judges?

 

[Conservative65]

Oh look, you're ignoring that Jesus didn't mention your type of marriage and but mentioned my type.

No, I'm acknowledging he said nothing about gays...but he did mention divorce. Why aren't divorced people being denied service by these "good Christians"?

He also mentioned marriage being between a man and a woman. Why do you ignore that?

What's to ignore? It was pretty much the only kind there was over 2,000 years ago. So what? It has nothing to do with the questions posed. Your continued deflection is noted.

Things you don't like that the Bible addresses. It has to do with you claiming things the Bible says then ignoring it when you don't like. Jesus didn't mention your kind of marriage. Tell me He didn't think it was a valid kind either.

Jesus didn't mention interracial marriage either.....Tell me he didn't think it was a valid kind either.

As long as it was a man and woman, he didn't have to.

 

[bodecea]

Our Constitution has made it our business.

Where does the Constitution say one person has to sell to another? I need the specific location.

Federal law says it and the Constitution protects the supremacy of federal law in the Supremacy Clause.

So you can't show me the specific location? Got it. Much like when I've asked for the location of where the Constitution says healthcare, food stamps, etc. you couldn't provide it. The 10th Amendment says things like that belong at the State level yet you big government idiots still want them at the federal level.

42 U.S. Code § 2000a - Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation

PA laws have been challenged and found Constitutional.

Religious freedom brings in an entire new ball game. Hence why SCOTUS agreed to hear the Colorado baker's case.

If the baker wins, your PA laws are worthless

So....then they will strike down all PA laws? Awesome! Let those who wish to discriminate against any group for any reason have at it! Back to the whites' only lunch counters!

 

[bodecea]

Our Constitution has made it our business.

Where does the Constitution say one person has to sell to another? I need the specific location.

Federal law says it and the Constitution protects the supremacy of federal law in the Supremacy Clause.

So you can't show me the specific location? Got it. Much like when I've asked for the location of where the Constitution says healthcare, food stamps, etc. you couldn't provide it. The 10th Amendment says things like that belong at the State level yet you big government idiots still want them at the federal level.

42 U.S. Code § 2000a - Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation

PA laws have been challenged and found Constitutional.

That's in the Constitution?

Things ONLY in the Constitution are legal?

 

[bodecea]

No, I'm acknowledging he said nothing about gays...but he did mention divorce. Why aren't divorced people being denied service by these "good Christians"?

He also mentioned marriage being between a man and a woman. Why do you ignore that?

What's to ignore? It was pretty much the only kind there was over 2,000 years ago. So what? It has nothing to do with the questions posed. Your continued deflection is noted.

Things you don't like that the Bible addresses. It has to do with you claiming things the Bible says then ignoring it when you don't like. Jesus didn't mention your kind of marriage. Tell me He didn't think it was a valid kind either.

Jesus didn't mention interracial marriage either.....Tell me he didn't think it was a valid kind either.

As long as it was a man and woman, he didn't have to.

Why would he not have to mention their race? How about their religion? How about their ages?

You seem to be presuming a lot on what Jesus believed.

I DO know he condemned those who divorce......and yet we have all these modern day christians who ignore that one clear and concise bit of teaching.

 

[easyt65]

Who said christians are disqualified as judges?

Diane Feinstein and a few other Democrats reportedly made that argument last week about a Catholic Judge up for appointment / confirmation....

 

[Conservative65]

Where does the Constitution say one person has to sell to another? I need the specific location.

Federal law says it and the Constitution protects the supremacy of federal law in the Supremacy Clause.

So you can't show me the specific location? Got it. Much like when I've asked for the location of where the Constitution says healthcare, food stamps, etc. you couldn't provide it. The 10th Amendment says things like that belong at the State level yet you big government idiots still want them at the federal level.

42 U.S. Code § 2000a - Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation

PA laws have been challenged and found Constitutional.

Religious freedom brings in an entire new ball game. Hence why SCOTUS agreed to hear the Colorado baker's case.

If the baker wins, your PA laws are worthless

So....then they will strike down all PA laws? Awesome! Let those who wish to discriminate against any group for any reason have at it! Back to the whites' only lunch counters!

I'm for a black owned business being able to have blacks' only lunch counters if they choose to do so. Unlike you, I don't get upset if someone tells me no.

 

[Conservative65]

Where does the Constitution say one person has to sell to another? I need the specific location.

Federal law says it and the Constitution protects the supremacy of federal law in the Supremacy Clause.

So you can't show me the specific location? Got it. Much like when I've asked for the location of where the Constitution says healthcare, food stamps, etc. you couldn't provide it. The 10th Amendment says things like that belong at the State level yet you big government idiots still want them at the federal level.

42 U.S. Code § 2000a - Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation

PA laws have been challenged and found Constitutional.

That's in the Constitution?

Things ONLY in the Constitution are legal?

Please, not that diversionary argument.

 

[Conservative65]

He also mentioned marriage being between a man and a woman. Why do you ignore that?

What's to ignore? It was pretty much the only kind there was over 2,000 years ago. So what? It has nothing to do with the questions posed. Your continued deflection is noted.

Things you don't like that the Bible addresses. It has to do with you claiming things the Bible says then ignoring it when you don't like. Jesus didn't mention your kind of marriage. Tell me He didn't think it was a valid kind either.

Jesus didn't mention interracial marriage either.....Tell me he didn't think it was a valid kind either.

As long as it was a man and woman, he didn't have to.

Why would he not have to mention their race? How about their religion? How about their ages?

You seem to be presuming a lot on what Jesus believed.

I DO know he condemned those who divorce......and yet we have all these modern day christians who ignore that one clear and concise bit of teaching.

I DO know he supported only heterosexual marriages . . . and yet we have all these folks claiming to know religion ignoring it.

 

[bodecea]

What's to ignore? It was pretty much the only kind there was over 2,000 years ago. So what? It has nothing to do with the questions posed. Your continued deflection is noted.

Things you don't like that the Bible addresses. It has to do with you claiming things the Bible says then ignoring it when you don't like. Jesus didn't mention your kind of marriage. Tell me He didn't think it was a valid kind either.

Jesus didn't mention interracial marriage either.....Tell me he didn't think it was a valid kind either.

As long as it was a man and woman, he didn't have to.

Why would he not have to mention their race? How about their religion? How about their ages?

You seem to be presuming a lot on what Jesus believed.

I DO know he condemned those who divorce......and yet we have all these modern day christians who ignore that one clear and concise bit of teaching.

I DO know he supported only heterosexual marriages . . . and yet we have all these folks claiming to know religion ignoring it.

How do you know that? Did he say "only hetero marriages, folks"?