Nashville Flower Shop Refuses Business with Republicans.

[BlindBoo]

.



"Subpoenies"? Is that a new kind of flowering perennial shrub?



.

Shut up and eat yer Oatmeal!

 

[bodecea]

The City gave business licenses to more than one flower shop. Find somewhere else.

Yep.

 

[bodecea]

Hypocrite. You demand the Christian baker accommodate your queers, but side with the crazy prejudiced bigots here.

Tissue?

 

[Richard-H]

Read the first amendment, you dumb fuck, before you comment on threads like this.

I can always tell a low I.Q. person - they have no sense of humor!

O.K., moron, there are several flaws in your logic:

First, we're talking about a business, not a religion, so the 1st amendment's "Free Exercise" clause does not apply - not even close.

Second, even if it did apply (which it does not), the way you interpret it, anyone's right to "Free Exercise" would overrule all state laws. So if a person felt it was their religious right to commit human sacrifice, their right to free exercise would over ride the State's laws against murder.

That's not how it works. You fail on multiple levels (as usual).

Geez, conversing with you is like talking to a 3rd grader!

 

[martybegan]

I can always tell a low I.Q. person - they have no sense of humor!

O.K., moron, there are several flaws in your logic:

First, we're talking about a business, not a religion, so the 1st amendment's "Free Exercise" clause does not apply - not even close.

Second, even if it did apply (which it does not), the way you interpret it, anyone's right to "Free Exercise" would overrule all state laws. So if a person felt it was their religious right to commit human sacrifice, their right to free exercise would over ride the State's laws against murder.

That's not how it works. You fail on multiple levels (as usual).

Geez, conversing with you is like talking to a 3rd grader!

Where does the Constitution say you lose your right to free exercise when you try to sell something?

Argumentum ad absurdum. Murder is not equivalent to making someone spend 10 minutes going to another baker for an event you plan for months in advance.

Your retorts are the ones usually done by idiot college students, who lock into whatever their prog professor tells them to think.


Now go fuck yourself with Biden's cock while Kamala deepthroats you.

 

[BS Filter]

Tissue?

Broken nose?

 

[Richard-H]

Where does the Constitution say you lose your right to free exercise when you try to sell something?

Argumentum ad absurdum. Murder is not equivalent to making someone spend 10 minutes going to another baker for an event you plan for months in advance.

Your retorts are the ones usually done by idiot college students, who lock into whatever their prog professor tells them to think.


Now go fuck yourself with Biden's cock while Kamala deepthroats you.

Aw, just because I destroyed your argument is no reason to get nasty.

The 1st amendments free exercise clause refers to the free exercise of religion - not the free exercise of anything you want.

Here it is - read what it says, not what you wish it says:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Now, instead of getting nasty, try manning up for once in your life and admitting that your wrong.

I doubt you can do that.

 

[bodecea]

Broken nose?

Well, MAGAts are clumsy AND violent all at once. You might have one.

 

[martybegan]

Aw, just because I destroyed your argument is no reason to get nasty.

The 1st amendments free exercise clause refers to the free exercise of religion - not the free exercise of anything you want.

Here it is - read what it says, not what you wish it says:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Now, instead of getting nasty, try manning up for once in your life and admitting that your wrong.

I doubt you can do that.

No, you didn't.

it says what I said it does, not what you want it to say, which is basically nothing if it goes against your SJW woke bullshit.

Religious exercise isn't just limited to clergy, or lay people during worship. It applies to their entire lives.

Other rights and interests can compete with it, but it cannot be ignored. And even if another right supersedes it, the government is limited to the least intrusive method to rectify the situation.

Now go play in fucking traffic and get run over by a Prius.

 

[BS Filter]

Well, MAGAts are clumsy AND violent all at once. You might have one.

Self defense isn't violence. You fuckers burn down neighborhoods and family businesses.

 

[Aldo Raine]

Hypocrite. You demand the Christian baker accommodate your queers, but side with the crazy prejudiced bigots here.

Nope I believe people should do business with whomever they chose.

 

[dblack]

First, we're talking about a business, not a religion, so the 1st amendment's "Free Exercise" clause does not apply - not even close.

People doing business are still people, with the same rights as anyone else.

 

[dblack]

Where does the Constitution say you lose your right to free exercise when you try to sell something?.

It doesn't. But that's basically the claim made by PA laws, and why they should be struck down.

 

[Richard-H]

No, you didn't.

it says what I said it does, not what you want it to say, which is basically nothing if it goes against your SJW woke bullshit.

Religious exercise isn't just limited to clergy, or lay people during worship. It applies to their entire lives.

Other rights and interests can compete with it, but it cannot be ignored. And even if another right supersedes it, the government is limited to the least intrusive method to rectify the situation.

Now go play in fucking traffic and get run over by a Prius.

No, dumbo, it doesn't say or mean that anyone can do or not do whatever they want just by declaring it to be based on their religious beliefs.

According to you, any crime can be protected based on anyone's religious beliefs. Any law can be ignored.

What is considered to be "Free Exercise" of religion is limited to religious activities within the bounds of the law.

It doesn't work the way you want. Any 3rd grader know that.

 

[Richard-H]

People doing business are still people, with the same rights as anyone else.

Yes, that's obvious. But if they want a business license they have to run their business in accordance with State Law.

 

[dblack]

No, dumbo, it doesn't say or mean that anyone can do or not do whatever they want just by declaring it to be based on their religious beliefs.

Right. The First Amendment limits government's right to regulate religion or religious beliefs. But it's not a get-out-of-jail free card. It doesn't allow religious people to commit crimes in the name of their religion and get away with it. The question is whether the acts in questions (if you can call not doing something an "act") should be illegal in the first place. Should a person be punished for refusing to bake a cake, or arrange flowers for someone else?

To me, the core concept of anti-discrimination law is insane and, as it expands into other areas of the law, will lead to worse and worse government. We're watching it happen.

It doesn't work the way you want. Any 3rd grader know that.

Did third grade leave its scars on you or something? You talk about it a lot.

 

[dblack]

Yes, that's obvious. But if they want a business license they have to run their business in accordance with State Law.

Yes, and that's the problem. Socialist wet dreams notwithstanding, we shouldn't have to ask the state permission to trade with others.

 

[martybegan]

It doesn't. But that's basically the claim made by PA laws, and why they should be struck down.

In a PA you are making a conscious choice to allow the public onto your property (or a property you control) for the purpose of performing transactions. That's the "in" given to the ability to regulate said transactions.

 

[dblack]

In a PA you are making a conscious choice to allow the public onto your property (or a property you control) for the purpose of performing transactions. That's the "in" given to the ability to regulate said transactions.

Any excuse will do.

 

[martybegan]

No, dumbo, it doesn't say or mean that anyone can do or not do whatever they want just by declaring it to be based on their religious beliefs.

According to you, any crime can be protected based on anyone's religious beliefs. Any law can be ignored.

What is considered to be "Free Exercise" of religion is limited to religious activities within the bounds of the law.

It doesn't work the way you want. Any 3rd grader know that.

It does mean the government has to give deference to a person's religious beliefs when making the laws in the first place.

You want to force these people to do something they don't want to do, or give up their livelihood. That isn't a choice, it's a hostage situation.