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.
couldn't a business just say no and leave it at that? do they owe an explanation?
Someone has gay fantasies on the mind.
There's a finer point to be made here.
A business reserves the right to refuse service to anyone. Sorta. Discrimination laws - right?
The case with the baker, etc, involves the fundamental right to, and the fundamental right to not, express a message.
The case with the restaurant does not.
And so you can still make the case the restaurant can refuse to serve anyone, its not the same argument as made with reference refusing to bake the cake.
if you agree to perform a service and back out then that is breach of contract. But a simple no ends the drama instantly.I guess, although this business said "yes" initially. So good business practice is to explain to your customer why you want to cancel the contract.
Further, explaining why saves the business the hassle of having to cancel or refuse other business, by letting them know that Normative People aren't welcome.
isn't it more of an establishment clause?Religious freedom is protected by the Bill Of Rights. Being a faggot isn't.
Better yet refund double the Christians money and deduct it from the employees payif you agree to perform a service and back out then that is breach of contract. But a simple no ends the drama instantly.
To be sure, if a Christian-run restaurant refused to serve Muslims, the reaction from the left would be far different than if a Muslim restaraunt refused to serve Jews.Religious freedom is protected by the Bill Of Rights. Being a faggot isn't.
Even better for business is don't be a dick and wind up on the news.Better yet refund double the Christians money and deduct it from the employees pay
isn't it more of an establishment clause?
LOL. The white grievance is precious. Likening themselves to blacks in the 1960's who were refused service at white restaurants.Well...there's no threat of bodily harm or injury to these "Christians"...like there was to blacks back then.
So the owner had to make a decision because the backlash to letting these "Christians" dine there would have probably been bigger than just denying them the reservation.
They would have to consecrate the marriage. In other words… Fuck. That would make them faggots.Huh, if two straight guys married, they wouldn’t have to have sex. Hell, they could still date women.
I don’t see the downside in many applications.
sort of but not really.Being a faggot? No. Being a Christian? Yes, it is a right protected from any interference.
sort of but not really.
Even better for business is don't be a dick and wind up on the news.
There's a finer point to be made here.
A business reserves the right to refuse service to anyone. Sorta. Discrimination laws - right?
The case with the baker, etc, involves the fundamental right to, and the fundamental right to not, express a message.
The case with the restaurant does not.
And so you can still make the case the restaurant can refuse to serve anyone, its not the same argument as made with reference refusing to bake the cake.
nowhere in the constitution does the word Christian appear. it's the word religion which applies more broadly.So name a law that allows discrimination against Christians.
If they say they did, but did not, how would you know?They would have to consecrate the marriage. In other words… Fuck. That would make them faggots.
nowhere in the constitution does the word Christian appear. it's the word religion which applies more broadly.
the establishment clause was put in because the founding fathers saw what influence the church of England had and didn't want us to end up just like back home.They didn't need to, since they were all referring to Christians; many of the colonies were founded by Christian dissenters. There weren't enough others around to bother worrying about. And even fewer sniveling atheists, which is why the poorly educated try and pass of Jefferson and and a couple of others as the only Founders they ever mention. And even then, they're wrong about Jefferson and have to lie; he was a Christian, and said so.
the establishment clause was put in because the founding fathers saw what influence the church of England had and didn't want us to end up just like back home.
