Refusal over personal beliefs

[ChrisL]

The typical urine drug test is not going to pick up on hard drugs. The only test that would pick up on that would be hair sample testing, and that is very expensive and very RARELY used.

It picks up more than you think. In fact, one of our drivers got busted for pot. He knew that he could be drug tested at any time, so he bought some stuff that guaranteed the passage of a drug test. You mix it with a lot of water and you supposedly will pass the test.

Well, he didn't pass the test because the test also detects these agents some people try to use to cover up narcotics usage.

When you go for these tests, you are asked a series of questions. One of them is for any prescription drugs you have taken. One time when I went, I told the nurse that my dentist had me on pain medication, but I haven't taken a pill in over a week. Two weeks later (I'm assuming when they got the results back) they did contact my dentist to confirm the medication I took and what dosage.

Read the link please.

How Long Do Drugs Stay in Your System?

 

[Seawytch]

Hey StupidWytch.

Let's suppose I owned an online retailer, now let's suppose you ordered an paid for a wedding gift from my site, now let's suppose I sent you an email that said "I'm sorry, but due to your state's laws concerning gay marriage I have decided not to do business there anymore. Feel free to request a refund"

Would you have cause to sue me for discriminating?

All states have the same law on gay marriage.

Evading is a wise choice, as you are getting your ass kicked in this thread.

Pointing out a fact isn't evading. Marriage laws regarding gays marrying are the same in all the states so if you choose to not do business in all the states, you're not a very good business person.

I doubt there are any laws requiring you to sell in any particular state if you're an online retailer.

 

[Seawytch]

You really are like all the RWNJs...you suck at analogies.

Springsteen is not refusing to perform for anyone, he's simply refusing to perform in a certain location. It has nothing to do with the people which is where any and all of your comparisons fail.

Here is how stupid partisan hacks are.

It is OBVIOUS that he is discriminating. He's discriminating against a state that chooses to pass a law that he doesn't like.

That's all well and good an I support his right to do so, but then an idiot like SeaWytch comes along and realizes that she can't admit that businesses (and E street band most certainly IS a business) without also admitting that any law which prohibits discrimination against certain groups is illegal.

In short SeaWytch, you are stupid and pathetic.

A state cannot be discriminated against. The people from the state can be, but not a single NC resident is prevented from attending a Springsteen concert.

If a baker lives in Anytown USA and Anytown decides to pass a non discrimination ordinance that protects gays from discrimination in Public Accommodation, the baker has two choices...they bake the cakes or they close shop. Bruce closed shop.

Not a single queer was being deprived a cake or photographer at their wedding

Not a single gay can't buy whatever cake they want or get whatever photographs of their queer wedding they want

Nice try, Kaz but you know you're wrong when it comes to the law. Nobody has been denied access to a Bruce Springsteen concert. They weren't told to go see another performer. Anyone can still go see Bruce...in a state other than NC.

The proper analogy (and you know it) is the baker baking the wedding cake regardless of WHO the customer is or they stop making wedding cakes.

Not a single queer was being deprived a cake or photographer at their wedding

I know you realize you don't have a valid comparison. No one had to go to another performer. We all can see how you've not identified anyone who has been discriminated against. It's because no one was.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Seawytch is a dishonest moron, who wants the state to force people to conform to her views, I'm moving on.

 

[Seawytch]

Seawytch is a dishonest moron, who wants the state to force people to conform to her views, I'm moving on.

So what have I been dishonest about?

What I want is for me to be able to discriminate against a Christian the way he can discriminate against me...or I want him not to be able to discriminate against me the way I'm prevented from discriminating against him.

Bruce Springsteen didn't discriminate against anyone.

You're "moving on" because you know you have no response to all the facts provided. Your hair on fire hyperbole can only get you so far.

 

[kaz]

Here is how stupid partisan hacks are.

It is OBVIOUS that he is discriminating. He's discriminating against a state that chooses to pass a law that he doesn't like.

That's all well and good an I support his right to do so, but then an idiot like SeaWytch comes along and realizes that she can't admit that businesses (and E street band most certainly IS a business) without also admitting that any law which prohibits discrimination against certain groups is illegal.

In short SeaWytch, you are stupid and pathetic.

A state cannot be discriminated against. The people from the state can be, but not a single NC resident is prevented from attending a Springsteen concert.

If a baker lives in Anytown USA and Anytown decides to pass a non discrimination ordinance that protects gays from discrimination in Public Accommodation, the baker has two choices...they bake the cakes or they close shop. Bruce closed shop.

Not a single queer was being deprived a cake or photographer at their wedding

Not a single gay can't buy whatever cake they want or get whatever photographs of their queer wedding they want

Nice try, Kaz but you know you're wrong when it comes to the law. Nobody has been denied access to a Bruce Springsteen concert. They weren't told to go see another performer. Anyone can still go see Bruce...in a state other than NC.

The proper analogy (and you know it) is the baker baking the wedding cake regardless of WHO the customer is or they stop making wedding cakes.

Not a single queer was being deprived a cake or photographer at their wedding

I know you realize you don't have a valid comparison. No one had to go to another performer. We all can see how you've not identified anyone who has been discriminated against. It's because no one was.

Of course I did, I gave you a list. Springsteen discriminated against gays, blacks, women, the elderly, youth, Hispanics and Muslims to start. He apparently only likes middle aged white men who can't be discriminated against because they are middle aged white men.

And note transgenders weren't allowed to go to the bathroom of choice at his concert

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Seawytch is a dishonest moron, who wants the state to force people to conform to her views, I'm moving on.

So what have I been dishonest about?

What I want is for me to be able to discriminate against a Christian the way he can discriminate against me...or I want him not to be able to discriminate against me the way I'm prevented from discriminating against him.

Bruce Springsteen didn't discriminate against anyone.

You're "moving on" because you know you have no response to all the facts provided. Your hair on fire hyperbole can only get you so far.

You are stupid an the world would be a better place if you weren't in it. Seriously, you are dumb, and dishonest. I gave you the EXACT definition of discrimination, and OBVIOUSLY when someone says "I'm not performing here because of ______________" that is discrimination

An you of course have also, stupidly, outed your own agenda. You aren't against discrimination at all, you just admitted you would like to discriminate against those mean old Christians.

You're a truly disgusting piece of shit. Have a good day.

 

[kaz]

Seawytch is a dishonest moron, who wants the state to force people to conform to her views, I'm moving on.

So what have I been dishonest about?

What I want is for me to be able to discriminate against a Christian the way he can discriminate against me...or I want him not to be able to discriminate against me the way I'm prevented from discriminating against him.

Bruce Springsteen didn't discriminate against anyone.

You're "moving on" because you know you have no response to all the facts provided. Your hair on fire hyperbole can only get you so far.

You're dishonest because that's a crock of shit. You want the validation. If you believed that, you would just fight to end PA laws, not expand them.

I want you to make a queer hating baker bake you a cake though, and eat it ...

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Seawytch is a dishonest moron, who wants the state to force people to conform to her views, I'm moving on.

So what have I been dishonest about?

What I want is for me to be able to discriminate against a Christian the way he can discriminate against me...or I want him not to be able to discriminate against me the way I'm prevented from discriminating against him.

Bruce Springsteen didn't discriminate against anyone.

You're "moving on" because you know you have no response to all the facts provided. Your hair on fire hyperbole can only get you so far.

You're dishonest because that's a crock of shit. You want the validation. If you believed that, you would just fight to end PA laws, not expand them.

I want you to make a queer hating baker bake you a cake though, and eat it ...

You are absolutely wasting your time with that person. It's obvious that they place agenda over honesty.

 

[Seawytch]

Seawytch is a dishonest moron, who wants the state to force people to conform to her views, I'm moving on.

So what have I been dishonest about?

What I want is for me to be able to discriminate against a Christian the way he can discriminate against me...or I want him not to be able to discriminate against me the way I'm prevented from discriminating against him.

Bruce Springsteen didn't discriminate against anyone.

You're "moving on" because you know you have no response to all the facts provided. Your hair on fire hyperbole can only get you so far.

You're dishonest because that's a crock of shit. You want the validation. If you believed that, you would just fight to end PA laws, not expand them.

I want you to make a queer hating baker bake you a cake though, and eat it ...

Project much?

PA laws don't bother me. Unequal application of them does. If I have to serve a Christian, he should have to serve me. If he doesn't have to serve me, I shouldn't have to serve him. It's that simple.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Seawytch is a dishonest moron, who wants the state to force people to conform to her views, I'm moving on.

So what have I been dishonest about?

What I want is for me to be able to discriminate against a Christian the way he can discriminate against me...or I want him not to be able to discriminate against me the way I'm prevented from discriminating against him.

Bruce Springsteen didn't discriminate against anyone.

You're "moving on" because you know you have no response to all the facts provided. Your hair on fire hyperbole can only get you so far.

You're dishonest because that's a crock of shit. You want the validation. If you believed that, you would just fight to end PA laws, not expand them.

I want you to make a queer hating baker bake you a cake though, and eat it ...

Project much?

PA laws don't bother me. Unequal application of them does. If I have to serve a Christian, he should have to serve me. If he doesn't have to serve me, I shouldn't have to serve him. It's that simple.

And you shouldn't have to serve a Christian, who has suggested you should have to serve a CHristian whilst that Christian can refuse service to you? Answer, ,no one.

 

[Seawytch]

Seawytch is a dishonest moron, who wants the state to force people to conform to her views, I'm moving on.

So what have I been dishonest about?

What I want is for me to be able to discriminate against a Christian the way he can discriminate against me...or I want him not to be able to discriminate against me the way I'm prevented from discriminating against him.

Bruce Springsteen didn't discriminate against anyone.

You're "moving on" because you know you have no response to all the facts provided. Your hair on fire hyperbole can only get you so far.

You are stupid an the world would be a better place if you weren't in it. Seriously, you are dumb, and dishonest. I gave you the EXACT definition of discrimination, and OBVIOUSLY when someone says "I'm not performing here because of ______________" that is discrimination

An you of course have also, stupidly, outed your own agenda. You aren't against discrimination at all, you just admitted you would like to discriminate against those mean old Christians.

You're a truly disgusting piece of shit. Have a good day.

What group of people were discriminated against? A state is not a person. The people of the state are not prevented from attending his concert.

I don't want to discriminate against Christians, I just want it equal. I cannot discriminate against him in all 50 states. He can discriminate against me in over half.

 

[boedicca]

Clearly, the moral of this is that the Very Rich & Famous have the Right To Virtue Signal by acting (or not) on their beliefs. The Hoi Poloi Knuckle Dragging Serfs, however, had just better Shut Up, Do and Buy what they are directed to by Their Betters.

 

[Seawytch]

Seawytch is a dishonest moron, who wants the state to force people to conform to her views, I'm moving on.

So what have I been dishonest about?

What I want is for me to be able to discriminate against a Christian the way he can discriminate against me...or I want him not to be able to discriminate against me the way I'm prevented from discriminating against him.

Bruce Springsteen didn't discriminate against anyone.

You're "moving on" because you know you have no response to all the facts provided. Your hair on fire hyperbole can only get you so far.

You're dishonest because that's a crock of shit. You want the validation. If you believed that, you would just fight to end PA laws, not expand them.

I want you to make a queer hating baker bake you a cake though, and eat it ...

Project much?

PA laws don't bother me. Unequal application of them does. If I have to serve a Christian, he should have to serve me. If he doesn't have to serve me, I shouldn't have to serve him. It's that simple.

And you shouldn't have to serve a Christian, who has suggested you should have to serve a CHristian whilst that Christian can refuse service to you? Answer, ,no one.

Title II of the Civil Rights Act requires I serve a Christian in all 50 states. In other words, Federal Law.

Local laws protect gays, Federal law protects Christians.

Go after federal law if you're REALLY concerned about "liberty".

 

[kaz]

Seawytch is a dishonest moron, who wants the state to force people to conform to her views, I'm moving on.

So what have I been dishonest about?

What I want is for me to be able to discriminate against a Christian the way he can discriminate against me...or I want him not to be able to discriminate against me the way I'm prevented from discriminating against him.

Bruce Springsteen didn't discriminate against anyone.

You're "moving on" because you know you have no response to all the facts provided. Your hair on fire hyperbole can only get you so far.

You're dishonest because that's a crock of shit. You want the validation. If you believed that, you would just fight to end PA laws, not expand them.

I want you to make a queer hating baker bake you a cake though, and eat it ...

Project much?

Um ... what? Yeah, I need validation for being a white guy, you got me.

Moron

PA laws don't bother me. Unequal application of them does. If I have to serve a Christian, he should have to serve me. If he doesn't have to serve me, I shouldn't have to serve him. It's that simple.

That's the point, Bruce not being forced to play while the baker is forced to bake cakes is pure inconsistency to anyone without an agenda. If you were a reasonable person, you'd advocate going to another baker, it's the height of ridiculous to stand in someone's store and force them to bake you a cake. And even more grotesque to force a photographer to come to a fag wedding and watch sexual deviant kissing.

But you're a militant dyke who enjoys the power of forcing someone to bake cakes. I'll let you take the first bite. And all the rest ...

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Seawytch is a dishonest moron, who wants the state to force people to conform to her views, I'm moving on.

So what have I been dishonest about?

What I want is for me to be able to discriminate against a Christian the way he can discriminate against me...or I want him not to be able to discriminate against me the way I'm prevented from discriminating against him.

Bruce Springsteen didn't discriminate against anyone.

You're "moving on" because you know you have no response to all the facts provided. Your hair on fire hyperbole can only get you so far.

You're dishonest because that's a crock of shit. You want the validation. If you believed that, you would just fight to end PA laws, not expand them.

I want you to make a queer hating baker bake you a cake though, and eat it ...

Project much?

PA laws don't bother me. Unequal application of them does. If I have to serve a Christian, he should have to serve me. If he doesn't have to serve me, I shouldn't have to serve him. It's that simple.

And you shouldn't have to serve a Christian, who has suggested you should have to serve a CHristian whilst that Christian can refuse service to you? Answer, ,no one.

Title II of the Civil Rights Act requires I serve a Christian in all 50 states. In other words, Federal Law.

Local laws protect gays, Federal law protects Christians.

Go after federal law if you're REALLY concerned about "liberty".

I DO go after federal law. I think it is completely abhorrent to liberty to suggest that the government can force us to work for someone we don't want to work for .

But you have actually bolstered my point . Federal law gives special protection to religion (as well as other groups) and that is unconstitutional.

You absolutely should be appalled by PA laws, but not solely based on the fact that you are gay and you want to discriminate against Christians, that is what makes your argument look weak and childish.

 

[kaz]

Seawytch is a dishonest moron, who wants the state to force people to conform to her views, I'm moving on.

So what have I been dishonest about?

What I want is for me to be able to discriminate against a Christian the way he can discriminate against me...or I want him not to be able to discriminate against me the way I'm prevented from discriminating against him.

Bruce Springsteen didn't discriminate against anyone.

You're "moving on" because you know you have no response to all the facts provided. Your hair on fire hyperbole can only get you so far.

You're dishonest because that's a crock of shit. You want the validation. If you believed that, you would just fight to end PA laws, not expand them.

I want you to make a queer hating baker bake you a cake though, and eat it ...

Project much?

PA laws don't bother me. Unequal application of them does. If I have to serve a Christian, he should have to serve me. If he doesn't have to serve me, I shouldn't have to serve him. It's that simple.

And you shouldn't have to serve a Christian, who has suggested you should have to serve a CHristian whilst that Christian can refuse service to you? Answer, ,no one.

Title II of the Civil Rights Act requires I serve a Christian in all 50 states. In other words, Federal Law.

Local laws protect gays, Federal law protects Christians.

Go after federal law if you're REALLY concerned about "liberty".

Absolutely, all PA laws should be overturned at every level. No government has a legitimate right to force any citizen to do business with another, it's a clear violation of the 5th amendment.

And that's what North Carolina did for their part with HB2, they said it's up to businesses who uses their bathrooms

 

[Fair&Balanced]

So what have I been dishonest about?

What I want is for me to be able to discriminate against a Christian the way he can discriminate against me...or I want him not to be able to discriminate against me the way I'm prevented from discriminating against him.

Bruce Springsteen didn't discriminate against anyone.

You're "moving on" because you know you have no response to all the facts provided. Your hair on fire hyperbole can only get you so far.

You're dishonest because that's a crock of shit. You want the validation. If you believed that, you would just fight to end PA laws, not expand them.

I want you to make a queer hating baker bake you a cake though, and eat it ...

Project much?

PA laws don't bother me. Unequal application of them does. If I have to serve a Christian, he should have to serve me. If he doesn't have to serve me, I shouldn't have to serve him. It's that simple.

And you shouldn't have to serve a Christian, who has suggested you should have to serve a CHristian whilst that Christian can refuse service to you? Answer, ,no one.

Title II of the Civil Rights Act requires I serve a Christian in all 50 states. In other words, Federal Law.

Local laws protect gays, Federal law protects Christians.

Go after federal law if you're REALLY concerned about "liberty".

Absolutely, all PA laws should be overturned at every level. No government has a legitimate right to force any citizen to do business with another, it's a clear violation of the 5th amendment.

And that's what North Carolina did for their part with HB2, they said it's up to businesses who uses their bathrooms

Which in turn, is also fine. If you don't like what a business does with their restrooms, shop elsewhere.

Absolutely hilarious that Bruce is fighting perceived discrimination with actual discrimination though. What a fucking fool.

 

[Seawytch]

Seawytch is a dishonest moron, who wants the state to force people to conform to her views, I'm moving on.

So what have I been dishonest about?

What I want is for me to be able to discriminate against a Christian the way he can discriminate against me...or I want him not to be able to discriminate against me the way I'm prevented from discriminating against him.

Bruce Springsteen didn't discriminate against anyone.

You're "moving on" because you know you have no response to all the facts provided. Your hair on fire hyperbole can only get you so far.

You're dishonest because that's a crock of shit. You want the validation. If you believed that, you would just fight to end PA laws, not expand them.

I want you to make a queer hating baker bake you a cake though, and eat it ...

Project much?

Um ... what? Yeah, I need validation for being a white guy, you got me.

Moron

PA laws don't bother me. Unequal application of them does. If I have to serve a Christian, he should have to serve me. If he doesn't have to serve me, I shouldn't have to serve him. It's that simple.

That's the point, Bruce not being forced to play while the baker is forced to bake cakes is pure inconsistency to anyone without an agenda. If you were a reasonable person, you'd advocate going to another baker, it's the height of ridiculous to stand in someone's store and force them to bake you a cake. And even more grotesque to force a photographer to come to a fag wedding and watch sexual deviant kissing.

But you're a militant dyke who enjoys the power of forcing someone to bake cakes. I'll let you take the first bite. And all the rest ...

That's a lovely sentiment. Does nothing to change federal law.

It does show us what an anti gay bigot you are though. Very effective in getting rid of those PA laws you abhor so much.

You do almost as much to get rid of PA laws as you did to get rid of "gubmit marriage".

 

[Seawytch]

So what have I been dishonest about?

What I want is for me to be able to discriminate against a Christian the way he can discriminate against me...or I want him not to be able to discriminate against me the way I'm prevented from discriminating against him.

Bruce Springsteen didn't discriminate against anyone.

You're "moving on" because you know you have no response to all the facts provided. Your hair on fire hyperbole can only get you so far.

You're dishonest because that's a crock of shit. You want the validation. If you believed that, you would just fight to end PA laws, not expand them.

I want you to make a queer hating baker bake you a cake though, and eat it ...

Project much?

PA laws don't bother me. Unequal application of them does. If I have to serve a Christian, he should have to serve me. If he doesn't have to serve me, I shouldn't have to serve him. It's that simple.

And you shouldn't have to serve a Christian, who has suggested you should have to serve a CHristian whilst that Christian can refuse service to you? Answer, ,no one.

Title II of the Civil Rights Act requires I serve a Christian in all 50 states. In other words, Federal Law.

Local laws protect gays, Federal law protects Christians.

Go after federal law if you're REALLY concerned about "liberty".

I DO go after federal law. I think it is completely abhorrent to liberty to suggest that the government can force us to work for someone we don't want to work for .

But you have actually bolstered my point . Federal law gives special protection to religion (as well as other groups) and that is unconstitutional.

You absolutely should be appalled by PA laws, but not solely based on the fact that you are gay and you want to discriminate against Christians, that is what makes your argument look weak and childish.

You do? How have you "gone after" Title II of the CRA? (That you didn't even seem to know exists)