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.
The First Amendment forbids public law from forcing anything on religious institutions, just as it forbids religious institutions from imposing their will on the public.
So churches should have the right to discriminate against homosexuals?
How about against racial minorities as well?
A church should have the right to the "free exercise" of it's beliefs. Take that how you will.
Any idiot can file a lawsuit- but since churches are exempt from PA laws the idiots will of course lose.
You mean religions are exempt from PA laws, don't you? Are you aware that religion resides in the heart of a man and it is individuals who are protected as to religious freedoms under the 1st?
The First Amendment forbids public law from forcing anything on religious institutions, just as it forbids religious institutions from imposing their will on the public.
So churches should have the right to discriminate against homosexuals?
How about against racial minorities as well?
A church should have the right to the "free exercise" of it's beliefs. Take that how you will.
No one is saying that a church should have to perform weddings it doesn't want to. Only that anyone conducting business with the public should treat its customers fairly and equally. Regardless of their race, creed, religion or sexual orientation.
One of those places is a man's heart... For where else does religion and the freedom of it ultimately reside?"Place of public accommodation" shall not include a church, synagogue, mosque, or other place that is principally used for religious purposes.
Not religions- facilities principally used for religious purposes.
COCODE
PA laws excepts religions.
The First Amendment forbids public law from forcing anything on religious institutions, just as it forbids religious institutions from imposing their will on the public.
So churches should have the right to discriminate against homosexuals?
How about against racial minorities as well?
A church should have the right to the "free exercise" of it's beliefs. Take that how you will.
No one is saying that a church should have to perform weddings it doesn't want to. Only that anyone conducting business with the public should treat its customers fairly and equally. Regardless of their race, creed, religion or sexual orientation.
Not yet. WHEN it happens they won't be going after the church as a church but as a public accommodation. My church is open to anyone that walks through the doors at anytime a service is conducted.
PA laws excepts religions.
As of now but that is how the push will take place. It won't the church as a church but as a public accommodation.
Well grab the brake lever on the run away train then, and slow that assault wagon down already, but you can't slow it down either can you, so just keep on jabbering like the rest of us I guess...LOLI am quite sure about, and rwheathengamer does not understand that in the religious sphere, under our Constitution, the churches will easily withstand any assault trying to make them marry people they don't want to marry.
The First Amendment forbids public law from forcing anything on religious institutions, just as it forbids religious institutions from imposing their will on the public.
So churches should have the right to discriminate against homosexuals?
How about against racial minorities as well?
A church should have the right to the "free exercise" of it's beliefs. Take that how you will.
No one is saying that a church should have to perform weddings it doesn't want to. Only that anyone conducting business with the public should treat its customers fairly and equally. Regardless of their race, creed, religion or sexual orientation.
Not yet. WHEN it happens they won't be going after the church as a church but as a public accommodation. My church is open to anyone that walks through the doors at anytime a service is conducted.
CHurches aren't businesses. They are explicitedly exempted from public accommodation laws. Someone will inevitably sue a church under public accomodation. And just as inevitably, everyone from the judge to the balliff to the court reporter will point and laugh as they toss the case out of court.
There are zero cases of public accommodation laws being used to force churches to perform weddings they don't want to perform. Nor is there a single advocate of such in 660 pages of this thread.
Its just fearmongering.
Well grab the brake lever on the run away train then, and slow that assault wagon down already, but you can't slow it down either can you, so just keep on jabbering like the rest of us I guess...LOLI am quite sure about, and rwheathengamer does not understand that in the religious sphere, under our Constitution, the churches will easily withstand any assault trying to make them marry people they don't want to marry.
OK, I'll give you a task then, umm I mean since you are so good at making so many excuses as to why something won't happen in your mind, then why not trying to give us the many excuses as to why it might surely occur, and this from within your mind about the foreseeable future maybe ? I know in that mind of yours you can come up with something... Try playing the opposite advocate for a change, because an open mind is never a good thing to waist right..LOLThe First Amendment forbids public law from forcing anything on religious institutions, just as it forbids religious institutions from imposing their will on the public.
So churches should have the right to discriminate against homosexuals?
How about against racial minorities as well?
A church should have the right to the "free exercise" of it's beliefs. Take that how you will.
No one is saying that a church should have to perform weddings it doesn't want to. Only that anyone conducting business with the public should treat its customers fairly and equally. Regardless of their race, creed, religion or sexual orientation.
Not yet. WHEN it happens they won't be going after the church as a church but as a public accommodation. My church is open to anyone that walks through the doors at anytime a service is conducted.
CHurches aren't businesses. They are explicitedly exempted from public accommodation laws. Someone will inevitably sue a church under public accomodation. And just as inevitably, everyone from the judge to the balliff to the court reporter will point and laugh as they toss the case out of court.
There are zero cases of public accommodation laws being used to force churches to perform weddings they don't want to perform. Nor is there a single advocate of such in 660 pages of this thread.
Its just fearmongering.
I'm aware that those laws CURRENTLY exist. I'm also aware that many laws dealing with unrelated things have gone by the wayside using the same argument I said would be used to do this.
30 years ago, when it came to same sex marriage in my State, a judge would have done exactly the same thing and laughed when a same sex couple said their rights were being violated.
What you seem to forget is that things change and this will be one of them. I'm willing to bet if an actual legal proceeding does happen, you and plenty of those on this thread will get in behind it because that's what your handlers will tell you is fair.
PA laws excepts religions.
As of now but that is how the push will take place. It won't the church as a church but as a public accommodation.
Again, churches are explicitly exempted from public accommodation laws. Public accommodation laws apply only to public businesses. Churches aren't public businesses.
You're literally arguing your imagination.
OK, I'll give you a task then, umm I mean since you are so good at making so many excuses as to why something won't happen in your mind, then why not trying to give us the many excuses as to why it might surely occur, and this from within your mind about the foreseeable future maybe ? I know in that mind of yours you can come up with something... Try playing the opposite advocate for a change, because an open mind is never a good thing to waist right..LOL
You can't have it just one way in life, and you will never have it that way, so deal with it if you can, because Christians aren't backing down from what they live for and what they believe in their life. PERIOD! The Christians should be grandfathered in anyways in this nation by now, and otherwise they should always have their place within this nation in which is respected by others in the nation, and all this new stuff should have to prove itself first, and so far the track record isn't looking so good when one looks at the statistics, and at other things that go on among the groups who want something new to evolve in America.
OK, I'll give you a task then, umm I mean since you are so good at making so many excuses as to why something won't happen in your mind, then why not trying to give us the many excuses as to why it might surely occur, and this from within your mind about the foreseeable future maybe ? I know in that mind of yours you can come up with something... Try playing the opposite advocate for a change, because an open mind is never a good thing to waist right..LOLSo churches should have the right to discriminate against homosexuals?
How about against racial minorities as well?
A church should have the right to the "free exercise" of it's beliefs. Take that how you will.
No one is saying that a church should have to perform weddings it doesn't want to. Only that anyone conducting business with the public should treat its customers fairly and equally. Regardless of their race, creed, religion or sexual orientation.
Not yet. WHEN it happens they won't be going after the church as a church but as a public accommodation. My church is open to anyone that walks through the doors at anytime a service is conducted.
CHurches aren't businesses. They are explicitedly exempted from public accommodation laws. Someone will inevitably sue a church under public accomodation. And just as inevitably, everyone from the judge to the balliff to the court reporter will point and laugh as they toss the case out of court.
There are zero cases of public accommodation laws being used to force churches to perform weddings they don't want to perform. Nor is there a single advocate of such in 660 pages of this thread.
Its just fearmongering.
PA laws excepts religions.
As of now but that is how the push will take place. It won't the church as a church but as a public accommodation.
Again, churches are explicitly exempted from public accommodation laws. Public accommodation laws apply only to public businesses. Churches aren't public businesses.
You're literally arguing your imagination.
AGAIN, as of now.\
OK, I'll give you a task then, umm I mean since you are so good at making so many excuses as to why something won't happen in your mind, then why not trying to give us the many excuses as to why it might surely occur, and this from within your mind about the foreseeable future maybe ? I know in that mind of yours you can come up with something... Try playing the opposite advocate for a change, because an open mind is never a good thing to waist right..LOLA church should have the right to the "free exercise" of it's beliefs. Take that how you will.
No one is saying that a church should have to perform weddings it doesn't want to. Only that anyone conducting business with the public should treat its customers fairly and equally. Regardless of their race, creed, religion or sexual orientation.
Not yet. WHEN it happens they won't be going after the church as a church but as a public accommodation. My church is open to anyone that walks through the doors at anytime a service is conducted.
CHurches aren't businesses. They are explicitedly exempted from public accommodation laws. Someone will inevitably sue a church under public accomodation. And just as inevitably, everyone from the judge to the balliff to the court reporter will point and laugh as they toss the case out of court.
There are zero cases of public accommodation laws being used to force churches to perform weddings they don't want to perform. Nor is there a single advocate of such in 660 pages of this thread.
Its just fearmongering.
30 years ago, a judge would have thrown out a case where two homos wanted him/her to overturn a State law against same sex marriage within that state. Skylar wants to make it out as if this can't change.
I'm aware that those laws CURRENTLY exist. I'm also aware that many laws dealing with unrelated things have gone by the wayside using the same argument I said would be used to do this.
Which laws that have 'gone by the wayside' are used to force churches to perform weddings they don't want to perform.
Cite the law and cite an example of a church being forced to perform a wedding they don't want. You'll find both are purely imaginary.
30 years ago, when it came to same sex marriage in my State, a judge would have done exactly the same thing and laughed when a same sex couple said their rights were being violated.
And 50 years ago, judges laughed interracial marriage out of many states. So? A tradition of pointless bigotry doesn't magically justify it.
What you seem to forget is that things change and this will be one of them. I'm willing to bet if an actual legal proceeding does happen, you and plenty of those on this thread will get in behind it because that's what your handlers will tell you is fair.
And what you seem to forget is that there are virtually no advocates for churches being forced to accommodate gay weddings. There's no legislation that indicates as much. Every PA law explicitly exempts religion. And there's no significant call for any such change.
You're arguing your imagination. And you have no connection to the real world.
