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.
Business's are not churches
Churches are not business's
Business's abide by laws that apply to business's- and pay taxes
Churches do not have to abide by the laws that are specific to business's- and do not pay taxes.
Not really that hard to distinguish between the two.
Correct.
However, that doesn't mean that every law is a just law. A point you seem to ignore.
Of course every law isn't a just law, but we are discussing this one specific law. Do you recognise any differences in the obligations of a business and the obligations of an individual?
No I certainly do not, for what is a business except a group of like minded individuals.
You don't lose your rights simply because you became a business owner.
For instance, can the government come in and search my business without a warrant? If the government passed a law that said they could would you say "hey too bad, you want to run a business, follow the law?"
A business can certainly be owned by individuals, but it is a legal entity. It is not a person. They can search your business as well as your house without a warrant in certain situations, but I get your point. Because business and persons share some characteristics doesn't make them the same. That's why you generally have to file papers to open a business and have a specific set of rules the business is obligated to adhere to. Individuals do not.
But, if a law in unconstitutional, it doesn't matter if it is aimed towards a person or towards a business.
The government certainly doesn't have the authority to force you to abridge your rights in order to open a business.
Correct.
However, that doesn't mean that every law is a just law. A point you seem to ignore.
Of course every law isn't a just law, but we are discussing this one specific law. Do you recognise any differences in the obligations of a business and the obligations of an individual?
No I certainly do not, for what is a business except a group of like minded individuals.
You don't lose your rights simply because you became a business owner.
For instance, can the government come in and search my business without a warrant? If the government passed a law that said they could would you say "hey too bad, you want to run a business, follow the law?"
A business can certainly be owned by individuals, but it is a legal entity. It is not a person. They can search your business as well as your house without a warrant in certain situations, but I get your point. Because business and persons share some characteristics doesn't make them the same. That's why you generally have to file papers to open a business and have a specific set of rules the business is obligated to adhere to. Individuals do not.
But, if a law in unconstitutional, it doesn't matter if it is aimed towards a person or towards a business.
The government certainly doesn't have the authority to force you to abridge your rights in order to open a business.
Certainly not. An individual has certain rights, and they are his to enjoy. As I said before, a business is not a person, and does not have the same rights as an individual. When Texas executes a business, or throws one in jail, then your claims might be valid.
No empathy for bigots
no one is saying have empathy for bigots. We're saying the GOVERNMENT does not have the authority to tell people they can't be bigots.
And they don't. All laws which do so are unconstitutional.
Being a bigot is an attitude, and no law can regulate that. However, their behavior can and should be regulated.
Under what authority ? Where in the COTUS does the government have the authority to regulate behavior?
Further Bulldog, if the goal is to not see anyone discriminated against, why can i discriminate against any group not specifically listed under these stupid laws? If I don't like dark haired people, I can hang a sign right outside my business "no dark haired people" perfectly legal. How is that so? Why aren't people afforded the same protection due to their hair color as they are due to their race?
Every law we have is to regulate behavior. Surely you understand that. Just because some people don't abide by the laws doesn't mean that is not the purpose of them. If you don't understand the reason or need for protected classes, you need to educate yourself. This is not the best place for you to learn basic concepts. If you want to discuss specifics about this one class, ok, but you at least need a working knowledge first.
If you want to be insulting, I'll just move on
Of course every law is meant to regulate behavior. But only behavior that violates the rights of another. You do NOT have a right to business with a business that doesn't want your business.
Can you not see that by trying to protect one group, you re violating the rights of another group?
Of course every law isn't a just law, but we are discussing this one specific law. Do you recognise any differences in the obligations of a business and the obligations of an individual?
No I certainly do not, for what is a business except a group of like minded individuals.
You don't lose your rights simply because you became a business owner.
For instance, can the government come in and search my business without a warrant? If the government passed a law that said they could would you say "hey too bad, you want to run a business, follow the law?"
A business can certainly be owned by individuals, but it is a legal entity. It is not a person. They can search your business as well as your house without a warrant in certain situations, but I get your point. Because business and persons share some characteristics doesn't make them the same. That's why you generally have to file papers to open a business and have a specific set of rules the business is obligated to adhere to. Individuals do not.
But, if a law in unconstitutional, it doesn't matter if it is aimed towards a person or towards a business.
The government certainly doesn't have the authority to force you to abridge your rights in order to open a business.
Certainly not. An individual has certain rights, and they are his to enjoy. As I said before, a business is not a person, and does not have the same rights as an individual. When Texas executes a business, or throws one in jail, then your claims might be valid.
Two COMPLETELY different topics, but in general business owners can be , and are, held criminally responsible if it is prove that they broke the law. Not as harshly as they should be in many cases, I agree with your there.
"... they’re in the face of some pizzeria owner from a small town, who’ll almost certainly never be asked to cater a gay wedding — except maybe now as a pretext to coax her formal refusal and trigger a lawsuit — and who, like every other Christian business owner who’s run up against antidiscrimination laws thus far, isn’t refusing service to gays as a rule. She’s refusing compulsory participation in a wedding ceremony that violates what her religion tells her is permissible."
"...Just got off the phone with #MemoriesPizza; they’re considering never opening again. Receiving a lot of death threats."
"Only when it costs them nothing, like in the absurd hypothetical of a great wave of Indiana businesses kicking gays out, do they pound the table. They’re beneath contempt."
Crisis in Indiana Random small-town pizzeria says it won t cater gay weddings Update Might not re-open Hot Air
No I certainly do not, for what is a business except a group of like minded individuals.
You don't lose your rights simply because you became a business owner.
For instance, can the government come in and search my business without a warrant? If the government passed a law that said they could would you say "hey too bad, you want to run a business, follow the law?"
A business can certainly be owned by individuals, but it is a legal entity. It is not a person. They can search your business as well as your house without a warrant in certain situations, but I get your point. Because business and persons share some characteristics doesn't make them the same. That's why you generally have to file papers to open a business and have a specific set of rules the business is obligated to adhere to. Individuals do not.
But, if a law in unconstitutional, it doesn't matter if it is aimed towards a person or towards a business.
The government certainly doesn't have the authority to force you to abridge your rights in order to open a business.
Certainly not. An individual has certain rights, and they are his to enjoy. As I said before, a business is not a person, and does not have the same rights as an individual. When Texas executes a business, or throws one in jail, then your claims might be valid.
Two COMPLETELY different topics, but in general business owners can be , and are, held criminally responsible if it is prove that they broke the law. Not as harshly as they should be in many cases, I agree with your there.
You might note that some of those owners (too few) went to jail for business practices that would be perfectly legal for them to do as an individual. A business, and an individual can't and shouldn't be considered the same.
Puddly has been proven a liar numerous times."realAmericans????" What do you mean by that? Do you mean the leftists who have the core belief that Americans with opposing opinion are faux Americans? Are you saying that in the arena of debate American people with divergent opinion from yours are not Americans?real Americans are going to fight for the principles
That's EXACTLY what Luddly is saying. He believes that if you don't agree with him politically you hate America and are a terrorist.
Of course Luddly is a lying piece of shit , so I wouldn't worry about it too much.
What is this? The 15th or 20th thread on this?
I think its a shame but what did the homophobic bigots expect?
If you feel so bad for the big-mouth bigots, send them more money.
Meanwhile, real Americans are going to fight for the principles on which this country was founded.
There is a lot that is not in the COTUS that libtards claim there is.No empathy for bigots
no one is saying have empathy for bigots. We're saying the GOVERNMENT does not have the authority to tell people they can't be bigots.
And they don't. All laws which do so are unconstitutional.
Being a bigot is an attitude, and no law can regulate that. However, their behavior can and should be regulated.
Under what authority ? Where in the COTUS does the government have the authority to regulate behavior?
Further Bulldog, if the goal is to not see anyone discriminated against, why can i discriminate against any group not specifically listed under these stupid laws? If I don't like dark haired people, I can hang a sign right outside my business "no dark haired people" perfectly legal. How is that so? Why aren't people afforded the same protection due to their hair color as they are due to their race?
YesNo empathy for bigots
no one is saying have empathy for bigots. We're saying the GOVERNMENT does not have the authority to tell people they can't be bigots.
And they don't. All laws which do so are unconstitutional.
Actually..what we're saying is the GOVERNMENT doesn't have the authority to force us to commit sacrilege, if we harm nobody in our abstention from participating in such.
^ And this is why your argument is a fail. You are focused on religion, screw that. The fact of the matter is ALL of the so called public accommodation laws are unconstitutional. I no more need justify my right to free association than I do my right to own a firearm
Lol..my argument isn't a fail at all, staab. Yes I'm focused on religion because it's a matter of freedom of religion.
We don't have any constitutional right to bigotry.
We do have a constitutional right to follow our conscience, as long as we do no harm in doing so.
I understand that it's too subtle for you, and that's okay.
Yes in fact you DO have a right to be a bigot.
Have you people ever actually READ the COTUS?
Exactlyno one is saying have empathy for bigots. We're saying the GOVERNMENT does not have the authority to tell people they can't be bigots.
And they don't. All laws which do so are unconstitutional.
Actually..what we're saying is the GOVERNMENT doesn't have the authority to force us to commit sacrilege, if we harm nobody in our abstention from participating in such.
^ And this is why your argument is a fail. You are focused on religion, screw that. The fact of the matter is ALL of the so called public accommodation laws are unconstitutional. I no more need justify my right to free association than I do my right to own a firearm
Lol..my argument isn't a fail at all, staab. Yes I'm focused on religion because it's a matter of freedom of religion.
We don't have any constitutional right to bigotry.
We do have a constitutional right to follow our conscience, as long as we do no harm in doing so.
I understand that it's too subtle for you, and that's okay.
Yes in fact you DO have a right to be a bigot.
Have you people ever actually READ the COTUS?
I can point to the part of the constitution that says we have the right to practice our religion.
But you can't point to the part of the constitution that says you have the right to be a bigot.
Like I said, it's too subtle for you.
Yep, and the pizzeria is correct.Actually..what we're saying is the GOVERNMENT doesn't have the authority to force us to commit sacrilege, if we harm nobody in our abstention from participating in such.
^ And this is why your argument is a fail. You are focused on religion, screw that. The fact of the matter is ALL of the so called public accommodation laws are unconstitutional. I no more need justify my right to free association than I do my right to own a firearm
Lol..my argument isn't a fail at all, staab. Yes I'm focused on religion because it's a matter of freedom of religion.
We don't have any constitutional right to bigotry.
We do have a constitutional right to follow our conscience, as long as we do no harm in doing so.
I understand that it's too subtle for you, and that's okay.
Yes in fact you DO have a right to be a bigot.
Have you people ever actually READ the COTUS?
I can point to the part of the constitution that says we have the right to practice our religion.
But you can't point to the part of the constitution that says you have the right to be a bigot.
Like I said, it's too subtle for you.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
Like I said, have you actually READ the COTUS?
A business can certainly be owned by individuals, but it is a legal entity. It is not a person. They can search your business as well as your house without a warrant in certain situations, but I get your point. Because business and persons share some characteristics doesn't make them the same. That's why you generally have to file papers to open a business and have a specific set of rules the business is obligated to adhere to. Individuals do not.
But, if a law in unconstitutional, it doesn't matter if it is aimed towards a person or towards a business.
The government certainly doesn't have the authority to force you to abridge your rights in order to open a business.
Certainly not. An individual has certain rights, and they are his to enjoy. As I said before, a business is not a person, and does not have the same rights as an individual. When Texas executes a business, or throws one in jail, then your claims might be valid.
Two COMPLETELY different topics, but in general business owners can be , and are, held criminally responsible if it is prove that they broke the law. Not as harshly as they should be in many cases, I agree with your there.
You might note that some of those owners (too few) went to jail for business practices that would be perfectly legal for them to do as an individual. A business, and an individual can't and shouldn't be considered the same.
can you give a few examples of business owners who went to jail for doing things that would have been legal for them to do as individuals?
What is this? The 15th or 20th thread on this?
I think its a shame but what did the homophobic bigots expect?
If you feel so bad for the big-mouth bigots, send them more money.
Meanwhile, real Americans are going to fight for the principles on which this country was founded.
What is this? The 15th or 20th thread on this?
I think its a shame but what did the homophobic bigots expect?
If you feel so bad for the big-mouth bigots, send them more money.
Meanwhile, real Americans are going to fight for the principles on which this country was founded.
"... they’re in the face of some pizzeria owner from a small town, who’ll almost certainly never be asked to cater a gay wedding — except maybe now as a pretext to coax her formal refusal and trigger a lawsuit — and who, like every other Christian business owner who’s run up against antidiscrimination laws thus far, isn’t refusing service to gays as a rule. She’s refusing compulsory participation in a wedding ceremony that violates what her religion tells her is permissible."
"...Just got off the phone with #MemoriesPizza; they’re considering never opening again. Receiving a lot of death threats."
"Only when it costs them nothing, like in the absurd hypothetical of a great wave of Indiana businesses kicking gays out, do they pound the table. They’re beneath contempt."
Crisis in Indiana Random small-town pizzeria says it won t cater gay weddings Update Might not re-open Hot Air
There's no mob quite as nasty as the pro-gay mob
"... they’re in the face of some pizzeria owner from a small town, who’ll almost certainly never be asked to cater a gay wedding — except maybe now as a pretext to coax her formal refusal and trigger a lawsuit — and who, like every other Christian business owner who’s run up against antidiscrimination laws thus far, isn’t refusing service to gays as a rule. She’s refusing compulsory participation in a wedding ceremony that violates what her religion tells her is permissible."
"...Just got off the phone with #MemoriesPizza; they’re considering never opening again. Receiving a lot of death threats."
"Only when it costs them nothing, like in the absurd hypothetical of a great wave of Indiana businesses kicking gays out, do they pound the table. They’re beneath contempt."
Crisis in Indiana Random small-town pizzeria says it won t cater gay weddings Update Might not re-open Hot Air
