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.
Do businesses have to serve polygamy (polyamory orientation) marriages there too? If not, why not? Please cite the 14th Amendment in your answer.Of course, its only fair. I don't think they have PA laws at all.
Who knew equality was bad?
If you went into a Muslim Restaurant and demanded to be served Pork and Beer, is it the obligation of that restaurant to provide for you? Or does it go against the Muslims religion? Double standards, without them, liberals would have no standards at all.
Oh Jez, not this shit again.
If a Muslim Restaurant does not have pork on the menu, then they don't have to sell pork to anyone.
If a Muslim Restaurant DOES have pork on the menu, then they cannot refuse service based on the religion, race, sex, age, disability, sexual orientation (in some states), marital status (in some states), or veterians status (in some states) of the customer.
>>>>
I doubt if they needed the Mississippi law to realize some people are repulsed by them. The Hissing Possums have a right to speak and a right to think what they wish. What they don't have the right to do is limit the equal rights of a group they don't like. We are ALL afforded the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of liberty and to be treated equally in public institutions. If you don't like them, think or say what you like, but you can't take action to treat them any differently than you would someone of like mind.The supremacy clause is what makes the Mississippi Legislature's ("40 hissing possums in a barn" - Jon Stewart) so amusing.The states pass laws put forth by their duly elected legislators which represent the views of the people of the state. Without the people of the individual states, there would exist no federal government. The federal government should stay out of imposing its will upon the people of the individual states.
"We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal." Yes indeed, all are created naked and created either male or female.
"That they are endowed by their Creator". Yes, by their Creator, not by the federal government.
"With certain inalienable rights. That among these are life." Yes we are given life by our creator, not by any act of the federal government.
"Liberty" Yes. When we are born, we have the liberty to cry when we are hungry or when our diaper needs changing. That liberty exists until the federal government takes it away from us.
"And the pursuit of happiness". Indeed we are endowed by our Creator with the right to pursue our own individual happiness. Nowhere are we guaranteed that we find happiness in life, only that we are guaranteed the right to pursue that happiness.
Federal law supersedes State law....Supremacy clause
I can't really find anything ever written in that era that said that federal laws supercede state laws.
First of all, Mississippi has no PA law, and the fed govt has not passed a PA law saying restaurants or bakers have to serve gays. SOOOOOO, even before our "new" law, nobody had to serve gays. That is, the law accomplishes nothing, beyond letting the possums vote to say they agree with not serving gays.
Secondly,. the act provides:
"3) The purposes of this section are as follows:
(a) To restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner,374 U.S. 398 (1963), and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and....
Basically, the congress and the scotus got into it over whether a law that on it's face does not discriminate against any religion may nevertheless run afoul of the First Amend if it impacts a religion - in that case it was whether Native Americans could use peyote in religious ceremonies. The Scotus said NAY, and the congress passed the Restoration of Religious Freedoms Act. The scotus has thus far declined to say Yay or Nay to the RRFA.
But this Act accomplishes nothing. If the scotus overturns the federal RRFA, this law cannot protect any individual from the application of federal law. That is, Mississippi native americans get no peyote ... of course they don't want any .... But god dammit the Hissing Possums must SPEAK
That's the point. The Hissing Possums have a First Amendment right to speak. That's what's really pissing off the gays. They are pissed because the folks in Mississippi are repulsed by them.
Mississippi gov. signs law allowing service denial to gays
There is no difference in this than denying service to blacks, women, Mexicans, Muslims, or liberals.
Bigotry is not freedom.Cool.
Choice = freedom
Do businesses have to serve polygamy (polyamory orientation) marriages there too? If not, why not? Please cite the 14th Amendment in your answer.Of course, its only fair. I don't think they have PA laws at all.
Who knew equality was bad?
I doubt if they needed the Mississippi law to realize some people are repulsed by them. The Hissing Possums have a right to speak and a right to think what they wish. What they don't have the right to do is limit the equal rights of a group they don't like. We are ALL afforded the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of liberty and to be treated equally in public institutions. If you don't like them, think or say what you like, but you can't take action to treat them any differently than you would someone of like mind.The supremacy clause is what makes the Mississippi Legislature's ("40 hissing possums in a barn" - Jon Stewart) so amusing.The states pass laws put forth by their duly elected legislators which represent the views of the people of the state. Without the people of the individual states, there would exist no federal government. The federal government should stay out of imposing its will upon the people of the individual states.
"We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal." Yes indeed, all are created naked and created either male or female.
"That they are endowed by their Creator". Yes, by their Creator, not by the federal government.
"With certain inalienable rights. That among these are life." Yes we are given life by our creator, not by any act of the federal government.
"Liberty" Yes. When we are born, we have the liberty to cry when we are hungry or when our diaper needs changing. That liberty exists until the federal government takes it away from us.
"And the pursuit of happiness". Indeed we are endowed by our Creator with the right to pursue our own individual happiness. Nowhere are we guaranteed that we find happiness in life, only that we are guaranteed the right to pursue that happiness.
Federal law supersedes State law....Supremacy clause
I can't really find anything ever written in that era that said that federal laws supercede state laws.
First of all, Mississippi has no PA law, and the fed govt has not passed a PA law saying restaurants or bakers have to serve gays. SOOOOOO, even before our "new" law, nobody had to serve gays. That is, the law accomplishes nothing, beyond letting the possums vote to say they agree with not serving gays.
Secondly,. the act provides:
"3) The purposes of this section are as follows:
(a) To restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner,374 U.S. 398 (1963), and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and....
Basically, the congress and the scotus got into it over whether a law that on it's face does not discriminate against any religion may nevertheless run afoul of the First Amend if it impacts a religion - in that case it was whether Native Americans could use peyote in religious ceremonies. The Scotus said NAY, and the congress passed the Restoration of Religious Freedoms Act. The scotus has thus far declined to say Yay or Nay to the RRFA.
But this Act accomplishes nothing. If the scotus overturns the federal RRFA, this law cannot protect any individual from the application of federal law. That is, Mississippi native americans get no peyote ... of course they don't want any .... But god dammit the Hissing Possums must SPEAK
That's the point. The Hissing Possums have a First Amendment right to speak. That's what's really pissing off the gays. They are pissed because the folks in Mississippi are repulsed by them.
Bigotry is not freedom.Cool.
Choice = freedom
The Mississippi law DOES do plenty to hurt others. Denies them food, shelter, clothing, and even the right to go to the bathroom. That is totally against God. It is totally against the teachings of Jesus.I doubt if they needed the Mississippi law to realize some people are repulsed by them. The Hissing Possums have a right to speak and a right to think what they wish. What they don't have the right to do is limit the equal rights of a group they don't like. We are ALL afforded the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of liberty and to be treated equally in public institutions. If you don't like them, think or say what you like, but you can't take action to treat them any differently than you would someone of like mind.The supremacy clause is what makes the Mississippi Legislature's ("40 hissing possums in a barn" - Jon Stewart) so amusing.Federal law supersedes State law....Supremacy clause
I can't really find anything ever written in that era that said that federal laws supercede state laws.
First of all, Mississippi has no PA law, and the fed govt has not passed a PA law saying restaurants or bakers have to serve gays. SOOOOOO, even before our "new" law, nobody had to serve gays. That is, the law accomplishes nothing, beyond letting the possums vote to say they agree with not serving gays.
Secondly,. the act provides:
"3) The purposes of this section are as follows:
(a) To restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner,374 U.S. 398 (1963), and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and....
Basically, the congress and the scotus got into it over whether a law that on it's face does not discriminate against any religion may nevertheless run afoul of the First Amend if it impacts a religion - in that case it was whether Native Americans could use peyote in religious ceremonies. The Scotus said NAY, and the congress passed the Restoration of Religious Freedoms Act. The scotus has thus far declined to say Yay or Nay to the RRFA.
But this Act accomplishes nothing. If the scotus overturns the federal RRFA, this law cannot protect any individual from the application of federal law. That is, Mississippi native americans get no peyote ... of course they don't want any .... But god dammit the Hissing Possums must SPEAK
That's the point. The Hissing Possums have a First Amendment right to speak. That's what's really pissing off the gays. They are pissed because the folks in Mississippi are repulsed by them.
Yes, gays aren't an acceptable group to hate, like Christians or something ...
BTW, no one is proposing to do anything to gays. It's how pathetic and weak the left is. Most people in history would be glad to just be left alone to live their lives. But leftists are so dependent on government that not getting validation and perks to you makes life actually unlivable. You people would have just starved and died at any other point in history
I doubt if they needed the Mississippi law to realize some people are repulsed by them. The Hissing Possums have a right to speak and a right to think what they wish. What they don't have the right to do is limit the equal rights of a group they don't like. We are ALL afforded the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of liberty and to be treated equally in public institutions. If you don't like them, think or say what you like, but you can't take action to treat them any differently than you would someone of like mind.The supremacy clause is what makes the Mississippi Legislature's ("40 hissing possums in a barn" - Jon Stewart) so amusing.Federal law supersedes State law....Supremacy clause
I can't really find anything ever written in that era that said that federal laws supercede state laws.
First of all, Mississippi has no PA law, and the fed govt has not passed a PA law saying restaurants or bakers have to serve gays. SOOOOOO, even before our "new" law, nobody had to serve gays. That is, the law accomplishes nothing, beyond letting the possums vote to say they agree with not serving gays.
Secondly,. the act provides:
"3) The purposes of this section are as follows:
(a) To restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner,374 U.S. 398 (1963), and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and....
Basically, the congress and the scotus got into it over whether a law that on it's face does not discriminate against any religion may nevertheless run afoul of the First Amend if it impacts a religion - in that case it was whether Native Americans could use peyote in religious ceremonies. The Scotus said NAY, and the congress passed the Restoration of Religious Freedoms Act. The scotus has thus far declined to say Yay or Nay to the RRFA.
But this Act accomplishes nothing. If the scotus overturns the federal RRFA, this law cannot protect any individual from the application of federal law. That is, Mississippi native americans get no peyote ... of course they don't want any .... But god dammit the Hissing Possums must SPEAK
That's the point. The Hissing Possums have a First Amendment right to speak. That's what's really pissing off the gays. They are pissed because the folks in Mississippi are repulsed by them.
Yes, gays aren't an acceptable group to hate, like Christians or something ...
BTW, no one is proposing to do anything to gays. It's how pathetic and weak the left is. Most people in history would be glad to just be left alone to live their lives. But leftists are so dependent on government that not getting validation and perks to you makes life actually unlivable. You people would have just starved and died at any other point in history
I doubt if they needed the Mississippi law to realize some people are repulsed by them. The Hissing Possums have a right to speak and a right to think what they wish. What they don't have the right to do is limit the equal rights of a group they don't like. We are ALL afforded the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of liberty and to be treated equally in public institutions. If you don't like them, think or say what you like, but you can't take action to treat them any differently than you would someone of like mind.The supremacy clause is what makes the Mississippi Legislature's ("40 hissing possums in a barn" - Jon Stewart) so amusing.Federal law supersedes State law....Supremacy clause
I can't really find anything ever written in that era that said that federal laws supercede state laws.
First of all, Mississippi has no PA law, and the fed govt has not passed a PA law saying restaurants or bakers have to serve gays. SOOOOOO, even before our "new" law, nobody had to serve gays. That is, the law accomplishes nothing, beyond letting the possums vote to say they agree with not serving gays.
Secondly,. the act provides:
"3) The purposes of this section are as follows:
(a) To restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner,374 U.S. 398 (1963), and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and....
Basically, the congress and the scotus got into it over whether a law that on it's face does not discriminate against any religion may nevertheless run afoul of the First Amend if it impacts a religion - in that case it was whether Native Americans could use peyote in religious ceremonies. The Scotus said NAY, and the congress passed the Restoration of Religious Freedoms Act. The scotus has thus far declined to say Yay or Nay to the RRFA.
But this Act accomplishes nothing. If the scotus overturns the federal RRFA, this law cannot protect any individual from the application of federal law. That is, Mississippi native americans get no peyote ... of course they don't want any .... But god dammit the Hissing Possums must SPEAK
That's the point. The Hissing Possums have a First Amendment right to speak. That's what's really pissing off the gays. They are pissed because the folks in Mississippi are repulsed by them.
We do it all the time though don't we? How many times have you read on this forum alone where the Liberals spout that the smoker is harming their health and that smoking should be banned altogether, taxes on tobacco products raised and insurance premiums for smokers be increased? Are you aware that anal sex is detrimental to one's health? Are you also aware that the life expectancy for homosexual males is now deemed to be from eight to twenty years less than that of heterosexual males? I then submit to you that male homosexuality should be forbidden by law from a medical standpoint.
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/bates/050607
http://www.webmd.com/sex/anal-sex-health-concerns
The Mississippi law DOES do plenty to hurt others. Denies them food, shelter, clothing, and even the right to go to the bathroom. That is totally against God. It is totally against the teachings of Jesus.I doubt if they needed the Mississippi law to realize some people are repulsed by them. The Hissing Possums have a right to speak and a right to think what they wish. What they don't have the right to do is limit the equal rights of a group they don't like. We are ALL afforded the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of liberty and to be treated equally in public institutions. If you don't like them, think or say what you like, but you can't take action to treat them any differently than you would someone of like mind.The supremacy clause is what makes the Mississippi Legislature's ("40 hissing possums in a barn" - Jon Stewart) so amusing.I can't really find anything ever written in that era that said that federal laws supercede state laws.
First of all, Mississippi has no PA law, and the fed govt has not passed a PA law saying restaurants or bakers have to serve gays. SOOOOOO, even before our "new" law, nobody had to serve gays. That is, the law accomplishes nothing, beyond letting the possums vote to say they agree with not serving gays.
Secondly,. the act provides:
"3) The purposes of this section are as follows:
(a) To restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner,374 U.S. 398 (1963), and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and....
Basically, the congress and the scotus got into it over whether a law that on it's face does not discriminate against any religion may nevertheless run afoul of the First Amend if it impacts a religion - in that case it was whether Native Americans could use peyote in religious ceremonies. The Scotus said NAY, and the congress passed the Restoration of Religious Freedoms Act. The scotus has thus far declined to say Yay or Nay to the RRFA.
But this Act accomplishes nothing. If the scotus overturns the federal RRFA, this law cannot protect any individual from the application of federal law. That is, Mississippi native americans get no peyote ... of course they don't want any .... But god dammit the Hissing Possums must SPEAK
That's the point. The Hissing Possums have a First Amendment right to speak. That's what's really pissing off the gays. They are pissed because the folks in Mississippi are repulsed by them.
Yes, gays aren't an acceptable group to hate, like Christians or something ...
BTW, no one is proposing to do anything to gays. It's how pathetic and weak the left is. Most people in history would be glad to just be left alone to live their lives. But leftists are so dependent on government that not getting validation and perks to you makes life actually unlivable. You people would have just starved and died at any other point in history
When your religion teaches you to hate others that are different than yourself, you are worshiping Satan. The KKK claims to be Christian, like ISIS claims to be Muslim.
IKR? My liberty ends at your nose, but yours shoots out my ass and continues going..Bigotry is not freedom.Cool.
Choice = freedom
If you went into a Muslim Restaurant and demanded to be served Pork and Beer, is it the obligation of that restaurant to provide for you? Or does it go against the Muslims religion? Double standards, without them, liberals would have no standards at all.
Oh Jez, not this shit again.
If a Muslim Restaurant does not have pork on the menu, then they don't have to sell pork to anyone.
If a Muslim Restaurant DOES have pork on the menu, then they cannot refuse service based on the religion, race, sex, age, disability, sexual orientation (in some states), marital status (in some states), or veterians status (in some states) of the customer.
>>>>
Lets try it from another angle, can a local or state government ban halal or kosher slaughter?
The Mississippi law DOES do plenty to hurt others. Denies them food, shelter, clothing, and even the right to go to the bathroom. That is totally against God. It is totally against the teachings of Jesus.I doubt if they needed the Mississippi law to realize some people are repulsed by them. The Hissing Possums have a right to speak and a right to think what they wish. What they don't have the right to do is limit the equal rights of a group they don't like. We are ALL afforded the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of liberty and to be treated equally in public institutions. If you don't like them, think or say what you like, but you can't take action to treat them any differently than you would someone of like mind.The supremacy clause is what makes the Mississippi Legislature's ("40 hissing possums in a barn" - Jon Stewart) so amusing.
First of all, Mississippi has no PA law, and the fed govt has not passed a PA law saying restaurants or bakers have to serve gays. SOOOOOO, even before our "new" law, nobody had to serve gays. That is, the law accomplishes nothing, beyond letting the possums vote to say they agree with not serving gays.
Secondly,. the act provides:
"3) The purposes of this section are as follows:
(a) To restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner,374 U.S. 398 (1963), and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and....
Basically, the congress and the scotus got into it over whether a law that on it's face does not discriminate against any religion may nevertheless run afoul of the First Amend if it impacts a religion - in that case it was whether Native Americans could use peyote in religious ceremonies. The Scotus said NAY, and the congress passed the Restoration of Religious Freedoms Act. The scotus has thus far declined to say Yay or Nay to the RRFA.
But this Act accomplishes nothing. If the scotus overturns the federal RRFA, this law cannot protect any individual from the application of federal law. That is, Mississippi native americans get no peyote ... of course they don't want any .... But god dammit the Hissing Possums must SPEAK
That's the point. The Hissing Possums have a First Amendment right to speak. That's what's really pissing off the gays. They are pissed because the folks in Mississippi are repulsed by them.
Yes, gays aren't an acceptable group to hate, like Christians or something ...
BTW, no one is proposing to do anything to gays. It's how pathetic and weak the left is. Most people in history would be glad to just be left alone to live their lives. But leftists are so dependent on government that not getting validation and perks to you makes life actually unlivable. You people would have just starved and died at any other point in history
When your religion teaches you to hate others that are different than yourself, you are worshiping Satan. The KKK claims to be Christian, like ISIS claims to be Muslim.
"It denies them food, shelter, clothing and even the right to go to the bathroom."
Hyperbole is such a terrible argument
Just like no one is proposing to do anything to "christians" , yet they become the most persecuted group ever. Which leads to their unending whiny.
How pathetic is the fact they use the tactics they seem to despise.
The become, "christians", one of the largest hypocritical groups ever.
I doubt if they needed the Mississippi law to realize some people are repulsed by them. The Hissing Possums have a right to speak and a right to think what they wish. What they don't have the right to do is limit the equal rights of a group they don't like. We are ALL afforded the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of liberty and to be treated equally in public institutions. If you don't like them, think or say what you like, but you can't take action to treat them any differently than you would someone of like mind.The supremacy clause is what makes the Mississippi Legislature's ("40 hissing possums in a barn" - Jon Stewart) so amusing.I can't really find anything ever written in that era that said that federal laws supercede state laws.
First of all, Mississippi has no PA law, and the fed govt has not passed a PA law saying restaurants or bakers have to serve gays. SOOOOOO, even before our "new" law, nobody had to serve gays. That is, the law accomplishes nothing, beyond letting the possums vote to say they agree with not serving gays.
Secondly,. the act provides:
"3) The purposes of this section are as follows:
(a) To restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner,374 U.S. 398 (1963), and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and....
Basically, the congress and the scotus got into it over whether a law that on it's face does not discriminate against any religion may nevertheless run afoul of the First Amend if it impacts a religion - in that case it was whether Native Americans could use peyote in religious ceremonies. The Scotus said NAY, and the congress passed the Restoration of Religious Freedoms Act. The scotus has thus far declined to say Yay or Nay to the RRFA.
But this Act accomplishes nothing. If the scotus overturns the federal RRFA, this law cannot protect any individual from the application of federal law. That is, Mississippi native americans get no peyote ... of course they don't want any .... But god dammit the Hissing Possums must SPEAK
That's the point. The Hissing Possums have a First Amendment right to speak. That's what's really pissing off the gays. They are pissed because the folks in Mississippi are repulsed by them.
Yes, gays aren't an acceptable group to hate, like Christians or something ...
BTW, no one is proposing to do anything to gays. It's how pathetic and weak the left is. Most people in history would be glad to just be left alone to live their lives. But leftists are so dependent on government that not getting validation and perks to you makes life actually unlivable. You people would have just starved and died at any other point in history
Bullshit, bigotry is a crime of hate....it's against the law to deny housing, food, or any other service, using bigotry to justify the denial. Pathetic little bigot.Bigotry is not freedom.Cool.
Choice = freedom
fixing bigotry is not a power of government
If you went into a Muslim Restaurant and demanded to be served Pork and Beer, is it the obligation of that restaurant to provide for you? Or does it go against the Muslims religion? Double standards, without them, liberals would have no standards at all.
Oh Jez, not this shit again.
If a Muslim Restaurant does not have pork on the menu, then they don't have to sell pork to anyone.
If a Muslim Restaurant DOES have pork on the menu, then they cannot refuse service based on the religion, race, sex, age, disability, sexual orientation (in some states), marital status (in some states), or veterians status (in some states) of the customer.
>>>>
Lets try it from another angle, can a local or state government ban halal or kosher slaughter?
Depends.
Can they ban religoius ceremonies during the slaughter process? No.
Can they ban specifics about the slaughtering process not based on religion to support a compelling government interest relating to health and safe of meat and poultry sold to the public? Yes.
>>>>>
The supremacy clause is what makes the Mississippi Legislature's ("40 hissing possums in a barn" - Jon Stewart) so amusing.The problem lies with the states
They lost the same sex marriage debate in the courts. Now, to save face with the haters in their state, they have initiated these gay harassment laws under the pretext of religion
The states pass laws put forth by their duly elected legislators which represent the views of the people of the state. Without the people of the individual states, there would exist no federal government. The federal government should stay out of imposing its will upon the people of the individual states.
"We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal." Yes indeed, all are created naked and created either male or female.
"That they are endowed by their Creator". Yes, by their Creator, not by the federal government.
"With certain inalienable rights. That among these are life." Yes we are given life by our creator, not by any act of the federal government.
"Liberty" Yes. When we are born, we have the liberty to cry when we are hungry or when our diaper needs changing. That liberty exists until the federal government takes it away from us.
"And the pursuit of happiness". Indeed we are endowed by our Creator with the right to pursue our own individual happiness. Nowhere are we guaranteed that we find happiness in life, only that we are guaranteed the right to pursue that happiness.
Federal law supersedes State law....Supremacy clause
I can't really find anything ever written in that era that said that federal laws supercede state laws.
First of all, Mississippi has no PA law, and the fed govt has not passed a PA law saying restaurants or bakers have to serve gays. SOOOOOO, even before our "new" law, nobody had to serve gays. That is, the law accomplishes nothing, beyond letting the possums vote to say they agree with not serving gays.
Secondly,. the act provides:
"3) The purposes of this section are as follows:
(a) To restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner,374 U.S. 398 (1963), and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and....
Basically, the congress and the scotus got into it over whether a law that on it's face does not discriminate against any religion may nevertheless run afoul of the First Amend if it impacts a religion - in that case it was whether Native Americans could use peyote in religious ceremonies. The Scotus said NAY, and the congress passed the Restoration of Religious Freedoms Act. The scotus has thus far declined to say Yay or Nay to the RRFA.
But this Act accomplishes nothing. If the scotus overturns the federal RRFA, this law cannot protect any individual from the application of federal law. That is, Mississippi native americans get no peyote ... of course they don't want any .... But god dammit the Hissing Possums must SPEAK
That's the point. The Hissing Possums have a First Amendment right to speak. That's what's really pissing off the gays. They are pissed because the folks in Mississippi are repulsed by them.
Bullshit, bigotry is a crime of hate....it's against the law to deny housing, food, or any other service, using bigotry to justify the denial. Pathetic little bigot.Bigotry is not freedom.Cool.
Choice = freedom
fixing bigotry is not a power of government
