Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Same bullshit, different decade.
In what way is it the same?
Same bullshit, different decade.
Nice photoshop. Same bullshit, same poster.
Moving on...
Deflection, insults. It's what you go to when you can't keep up. Which is every discussion.You're a moron.Who fucking cares......Yep. So why is are there Americans wanting laws passed based on their particular brand of religion?
Why are certain RWs against it when Muslims do it but all in favor of it when its American fundies?
Laws based on religious beliefs are, by definition sharia laws and I don't want sharia law in the US.
Buyt you're right that many RWs are in favor of sharia laws in the US - like Mike Pence.
This is not a law basd on religious beliefs. It is the opposite of that in fact.
Yeah, that's probably why they named it the RELIGIOUS Freedom Act.
Read it.
I apologize if I'm the one who gave Rabbi the head trauma he's been recently exhibiting.
...even worse than the usual Rabbi.
too dumbnever been there! so your attempt at humor fails epically as always..
Never been to Indiana? Cool, so what right is it of yours to judge? Hmm?
if what happens in Indiana affects other states then I have every right to judge. that's why shit head..never been there! so your attempt at humor fails epically as always..
Never been to Indiana? Cool, so what right is it of yours to judge? Hmm?
No, I didnt. You have trouble reading simple things, dontcha?He admitted no such thing because that isnt true. Only the application to states was ruled unconstititional.Oh, and Boerne ruled the RFRA unconstitutional as it applied to the states. Congress could not compel the states to enforce the law on its own, therefore it was left to the states to pass these laws. I do believe the 10th Amendment granted them that right.
Ok, so after your usual kicking and screaming tantrum, you've admitted that yes, the law was ruled unconstitutional.
You get your ass handed to you every time.
You just admitted it.
During the conversation I mentioned the great social change that took place in our churches. A few years ago, Negroes had their own churches, and now, the very churches that one spoke against interracial marriages are performing interracial marriages.
It was at this time that I told him that these same churches will, in time, freely admit homosexuals into their congregations, followed by the performance of same-sex marriages.
He thought I was crazy - over reacting!
The KKK and It s Beliefs On Homosexuality
bitch please!Deflection, insults. It's what you go to when you can't keep up. Which is every discussion.You're a moron.Who fucking cares......
Laws based on religious beliefs are, by definition sharia laws and I don't want sharia law in the US.
Buyt you're right that many RWs are in favor of sharia laws in the US - like Mike Pence.
This is not a law basd on religious beliefs. It is the opposite of that in fact.
Yeah, that's probably why they named it the RELIGIOUS Freedom Act.
Read it.
I apologize if I'm the one who gave Rabbi the head trauma he's been recently exhibiting.
...even worse than the usual Rabbi.
You're an idiot, like that's news.Again, if the law is NOT designed to allow discrimination against gays (among others)
what IS it designed to do.
Someone give us a few cases of where this law would be applied by, let's say, a Christian businessman that would NOT involve discrimination.
Please. Anyone.
no! it always been you. just read your posts.. the desperation and ignorance are so thick it's laughableDuring the conversation I mentioned the great social change that took place in our churches. A few years ago, Negroes had their own churches, and now, the very churches that one spoke against interracial marriages are performing interracial marriages.
It was at this time that I told him that these same churches will, in time, freely admit homosexuals into their congregations, followed by the performance of same-sex marriages.
He thought I was crazy - over reacting!
The KKK and It s Beliefs On Homosexuality
You are so desperate, aren't you?
Um, who is pushing for policies that force bakers to bake cakes for clients they dont want? You don tthink this stuff out, do you?So, there are other bakers, florists, wedding planners, DJ's etc who can accommodate the couple.not all, just the bigoted ones...flowers and cake don't care who smells them or eats them.ALL florists and bakers are right wing religious zealots?Why did Governor Pence go virtually epileptic Sunday when asked the simple question would the law allow a florists and bakers to discriminate against gays?
Either it does or it doesn't.
Does it? Doesn't it?
Who knew?
the money could give a shit too.
Why a gay couple would practically DEMAND a service from the owners of an establishment who doesn't share their views is beyond me.
Should I demand Chic-fil-Abe open on Sundays because I really want their sandwich?
To some people, tolerance is not enough. They feel compelled to force Acceptance, which is rather an oxymoron.
Yep and the RWs want more and more laws, bigger and bigger government and the more invasive, the better.
false...You're an idiot, like that's news.Again, if the law is NOT designed to allow discrimination against gays (among others)
what IS it designed to do.
Someone give us a few cases of where this law would be applied by, let's say, a Christian businessman that would NOT involve discrimination.
Please. Anyone.
The Hobby Lobby case before the Supreme Court is exactly the kind of thing this bill covers.
Ironic post is moronic.oh oh not the theI want to know the REASONS for the law that do not involve a religious defense to discriminate.
Give us ONE good example. In your own words.
Why? Where in that law do the words "discriminate" or "businesses shall have the right to discriminate based on religion" appear in the law? Can you prove to me that this law is different, I repeat, different from the 19 other laws already passed across the country?
Oh no, not another incoherent post from you!
I'm done. Ignored.
That's what you always do. A lot of name calling, sarcasm, nastiness and when it gets handed back to you, you run like the scared little boy you are.
Have the balls to stay on topic and discuss it like an adult.
Wrong. The Indiana statute also applies only to government.The federal law applies ONLY to actions taken by the government. For example, a prison refusing to allow a Muslim prisoner to wear a beard. It does not apply to dealings between individuals. Indiana's law does apply in that situation and in fact enjoins the state from preventing discrimination on any grounds so long as the discriminator can prove a "sincere religious belief" that requires said discrimination. A baker could now refuse to bake for an interracial couple, a gay couple, a Jewish couple or a Christian couple depending on the baker's
"sincerely held religious beliefs". That's a huge, huge difference.
Um, who is pushing for policies that force bakers to bake cakes for clients they dont want? You don tthink this stuff out, do you?So, there are other bakers, florists, wedding planners, DJ's etc who can accommodate the couple.not all, just the bigoted ones...flowers and cake don't care who smells them or eats them.ALL florists and bakers are right wing religious zealots?
Who knew?
the money could give a shit too.
Why a gay couple would practically DEMAND a service from the owners of an establishment who doesn't share their views is beyond me.
Should I demand Chic-fil-Abe open on Sundays because I really want their sandwich?
To some people, tolerance is not enough. They feel compelled to force Acceptance, which is rather an oxymoron.
Yep and the RWs want more and more laws, bigger and bigger government and the more invasive, the better.
Sure and the one with the French waitress isn't?
Same bullshit, different decade.
In what way is it the same?
Same bullshit, different decade.
Nice photoshop.
No photoshop. Sorry!
Wrong. The Indiana statute also applies only to government.The federal law applies ONLY to actions taken by the government. For example, a prison refusing to allow a Muslim prisoner to wear a beard. It does not apply to dealings between individuals. Indiana's law does apply in that situation and in fact enjoins the state from preventing discrimination on any grounds so long as the discriminator can prove a "sincere religious belief" that requires said discrimination. A baker could now refuse to bake for an interracial couple, a gay couple, a Jewish couple or a Christian couple depending on the baker's
"sincerely held religious beliefs". That's a huge, huge difference.
Because you dont respect religion. We get it.Um, who is pushing for policies that force bakers to bake cakes for clients they dont want? You don tthink this stuff out, do you?So, there are other bakers, florists, wedding planners, DJ's etc who can accommodate the couple.not all, just the bigoted ones...flowers and cake don't care who smells them or eats them.
the money could give a shit too.
Why a gay couple would practically DEMAND a service from the owners of an establishment who doesn't share their views is beyond me.
Should I demand Chic-fil-Abe open on Sundays because I really want their sandwich?
To some people, tolerance is not enough. They feel compelled to force Acceptance, which is rather an oxymoron.
Yep and the RWs want more and more laws, bigger and bigger government and the more invasive, the better.
Not me.
I just think laws should apply equally across the board.
No special dispensation for fundie phobes.
The laws are substantially the same. That's already been shown.Wrong. The Indiana statute also applies only to government.The federal law applies ONLY to actions taken by the government. For example, a prison refusing to allow a Muslim prisoner to wear a beard. It does not apply to dealings between individuals. Indiana's law does apply in that situation and in fact enjoins the state from preventing discrimination on any grounds so long as the discriminator can prove a "sincere religious belief" that requires said discrimination. A baker could now refuse to bake for an interracial couple, a gay couple, a Jewish couple or a Christian couple depending on the baker's
"sincerely held religious beliefs". That's a huge, huge difference.
Read it. It applies to individuals in business.
