Which "side" of the "fence" are you on?

[danielpalos]

Anything that may require a license is not a right.

Again, what do you base that on?

A self-evident Truth, fixed by Judicial, precedent under the common law.

none of which answers the question of where the constitution says all this.

Why do you believe Congress may not Regulate well, forms of Commerce?

They can't override a person's right to free exercise without a compelling government interest. and even then, they have to use the least invasive method possible to rectify the situation.

You are referring to privileges and immunities. For-profit establishment means profit is a legal requirement, not social morals.

 

[martybegan]

Again, what do you base that on?

A self-evident Truth, fixed by Judicial, precedent under the common law.

none of which answers the question of where the constitution says all this.

Why do you believe Congress may not Regulate well, forms of Commerce?

They can't override a person's right to free exercise without a compelling government interest. and even then, they have to use the least invasive method possible to rectify the situation.

You are referring to privileges and immunities. For-profit establishment means profit is a legal requirement, not social morals.

Actually it isn't a requirement to make a profit as a for profit. Most people make sure their business breaks even or shows a loss via "creative accounting".

And when i refer to free exercise I refer to a right, granted by the 1st amendment.

 

[danielpalos]

A self-evident Truth, fixed by Judicial, precedent under the common law.

none of which answers the question of where the constitution says all this.

Why do you believe Congress may not Regulate well, forms of Commerce?

They can't override a person's right to free exercise without a compelling government interest. and even then, they have to use the least invasive method possible to rectify the situation.

You are referring to privileges and immunities. For-profit establishment means profit is a legal requirement, not social morals.

Actually it isn't a requirement to make a profit as a for profit. Most people make sure their business breaks even or shows a loss via "creative accounting".

And when i refer to free exercise I refer to a right, granted by the 1st amendment.

Only tax avoiders do that; not Good tax paying citizens.

 

[martybegan]

none of which answers the question of where the constitution says all this.

Why do you believe Congress may not Regulate well, forms of Commerce?

They can't override a person's right to free exercise without a compelling government interest. and even then, they have to use the least invasive method possible to rectify the situation.

You are referring to privileges and immunities. For-profit establishment means profit is a legal requirement, not social morals.

Actually it isn't a requirement to make a profit as a for profit. Most people make sure their business breaks even or shows a loss via "creative accounting".

And when i refer to free exercise I refer to a right, granted by the 1st amendment.

Only tax avoiders do that; not Good tax paying citizens.

Anyone that doesn't take any deduction they are legally entitled to is an idiot.

 

[JoeB131]

Nice attempt at argumentum ad absurdum, but I am in no way an anarchist. You propose government being the police of every little annoying fucking thing, as long as it annoys YOU.

And you bigoted fascist tendencies just keep shining on.

Except this wasn't a little thing. And my guess, Mr. Wifebeater probably abused a lot of gay customers before one of them finally complained about him.

 

[JoeB131]

And when i refer to free exercise I refer to a right, granted by the 1st amendment.

Again, buddy... businesses don't have religions. And if we start letting people ignore the law because their magic friend in the sky says so, we are in for a lot of chaos.

 

[martybegan]

Nice attempt at argumentum ad absurdum, but I am in no way an anarchist. You propose government being the police of every little annoying fucking thing, as long as it annoys YOU.

And you bigoted fascist tendencies just keep shining on.

Except this wasn't a little thing. And my guess, Mr. Wifebeater probably abused a lot of gay customers before one of them finally complained about him.

More statements with zero proof. If this were a court of law you would be in jail for perjury. If you made these Statements in public, you could probably be sued for slander.

 

[martybegan]

And when i refer to free exercise I refer to a right, granted by the 1st amendment.

Again, buddy... businesses don't have religions. And if we start letting people ignore the law because their magic friend in the sky says so, we are in for a lot of chaos.

People are part of businesses, and they still have rights. Stop trying to pretend that isn't the case.

The law shouldn't be punishing them for butt hurt in the first place.

 

[justfor]

And when i refer to free exercise I refer to a right, granted by the 1st amendment.

Again, buddy... businesses don't have religions. And if we start letting people ignore the law because their magic friend in the sky says so, we are in for a lot of chaos.

The problem is - isn't chaos exactly what people want?

 

[JoeB131]

People are part of businesses, and they still have rights. Stop trying to pretend that isn't the case.

The law shouldn't be punishing them for butt hurt in the first place.

They weren't punished for butthurt. They were punished for discrimination based on sexual orientation, which is a crime in Oregon.

 

[martybegan]

People are part of businesses, and they still have rights. Stop trying to pretend that isn't the case.

The law shouldn't be punishing them for butt hurt in the first place.

They weren't punished for butthurt. They were punished for discrimination based on sexual orientation, which is a crime in Oregon.

They were punished for butt hurt.

And it's not a "crime" it's a civil violation. There is a difference.

 

[Yarddog]

There are forces trying to create that fence between us I believe. And this rally, though instigated by people from the KKK and other extremists, also saw other show up with clubs and ready to fight before the rally ever started. Maybe they are all on the same side of the "fence".

The failure here was with the local police and mayor for not blocking off streets and keeping these guys separated. Did they want this to happen?

You don't think the people (who organized this rally) showing up in body armor and carrying automatic weapons, odd?

Absolutely. I find the supremecist beliefs of the KKK and groups like them disgusting. Do I think those are the beliefs of most Americans who consider themselves nationalist? no way. That's the fabrication.
But back to the protest. Though the KKK and white supremists are disgusting in their racist beliefs, They had acquired a permit for the march. Did the counter protestors??? I'm not sure, maybe they did.
Now maybe if the Groups who made up "Unite the Right" were so bad, then the city SHOULD HAVE denied them the permit to march.

That was not the case, so it was on the city and the mayor to provide the original marchers access to their route. Freedom of expression is granted even to people you do not agree with in America. Now watching the video, I see the ANTIFA marchers directly impeded a protest march which had a permit to do so. Antifa was just as violent, were you not watching??? The difference is that someone died, but this same violence from the left has been ongoing.

The real problem was with the police here and the city planning. They had to know this would be a powder keg but they allowed direct confrontation.

 

[JoeB131]

They were punished for butt hurt.

And it's not a "crime" it's a civil violation. There is a difference.

You are right. We should make homophobia a crime. That would solve a lot of problems.

I also think that we should revoke the tax exemption for any church that preaches homophobia. It will be AMAZING how fast "God" changes his mind.

 

[Yarddog]

Again you got one side fighting against a real injustice and the other who made up a lie and is now trying to enforce the lie they have made themselves believe.

One side is fighting for equality and the other side is fighting for supremacy.

Equality really? but you have to be careful hiding behind the premise of equality. The murderous POL POT revolution began as something FOR the people. Basically it was a social justice movement.
Now you have this well meaning leftist movement here in the US and what they do is take American society as a whole and call it unjust, and unequal. I'm white, therefore I am privileged, and by all accounts that is an injustice. I am alive and white and have an unfair advantage, so I must be corrected. That is a microcosm, and just off the top of my head but there are many other things involving political correctness that is being turned into an equality issue.
I'm sorry but I'm seeing this movement as having created a never ending grievance. Today, its a few statues, then it will be all of them. Then it will be changing the names of streets, parks, buildings, etc and it will all have been done in the name of fairness for the people. But what most of us rational people you might call righties are looking at is, where does it stop? who gets to make the definition of what is offensive and what is not offensive? and is one persons offense more righteous than the others? Then you have the silencing and shouting down of opposing viewpoints. That is also very dangerous, because again. Who gets to decide?
I'm against tearing down of these monuments because that in itself is very symbolic of the INTOLERANCE that is taking over this country today. What ever happened to liberals that they want to start the civil war all over again?
Movements like this start out small but end up sowing hatred where it was never necessary to do. Many major genocides in history started out as being for the people. And just because someone calls them self an environmentalist doesn't make them a good person and they can be mentally imbalanced.

 

[IM2]

Again you got one side fighting against a real injustice and the other who made up a lie and is now trying to enforce the lie they have made themselves believe.

One side is fighting for equality and the other side is fighting for supremacy.

Equality really? but you have to be careful hiding behind the premise of equality. The murderous POL POT revolution began as something FOR the people. Basically it was a social justice movement.
Now you have this well meaning leftist movement here in the US and what they do is take American society as a whole and call it unjust, and unequal. I'm white, therefore I am privileged, and by all accounts that is an injustice. I am alive and white and have an unfair advantage, so I must be corrected. That is a microcosm, and just off the top of my head but there are many other things involving political correctness that is being turned into an equality issue.
I'm sorry but I'm seeing this movement as having created a never ending grievance. Today, its a few statues, then it will be all of them. Then it will be changing the names of streets, parks, buildings, etc and it will all have been done in the name of fairness for the people. But what most of us rational people you might call righties are looking at is, where does it stop? who gets to make the definition of what is offensive and what is not offensive? and is one persons offense more righteous than the others? Then you have the silencing and shouting down of opposing viewpoints. That is also very dangerous, because again. Who gets to decide?
I'm against tearing down of these monuments because that in itself is very symbolic of the INTOLERANCE that is taking over this country today. What ever happened to liberals that they want to start the civil war all over again?
Movements like this start out small but end up sowing hatred where it was never necessary to do. Many major genocides in history started out as being for the people. And just because someone calls them self an environmentalist doesn't make them a good person and they can be mentally imbalanced.

There are some truths that you white people just need to accept and work to change. White racism has.been never ending. Until it ends grievances created by it doesn't end. And so what if we take down every statue? We are not to worship graven images in the first place. It's not intolerant to oppose symbols of oppression.on top of that, these statues are getting removed by the vote of the cities removing them. Like I keep saying, we see ZERO statues of Nat Turner. Why?

Because he went on a rampage killing white racist slave owning t rash. To me that's worthy of a statue. He fought slavery in the most literal form. That makes him a hero worthy of a statue of Robert E Lee and any other confederate soldier gets one. But you can't see that. And it's because you think that the only way to look at things is how whites look at is. It's not going to be the only way as long as others besides whites live here.

The citizens of Charlottesville decided the statue of Lee was offensive. They made that determination by the use of the democratic process. At the minimum symbols of slavery be offensive without the dumb ass questions you ask about who determines what is offensive, The racist viewpoint should be shouted down. Racism should be silenced. Are you that entrenched in your racism that you actually believe that you want to fight another civil war?

 

[Billo_Really]

By looking at the statistics? BLM has killed far more in the past 10 years.

It must seem like magic to you.

Where's your link? Lets see these statistics.

 

[Billo_Really]

Both extremist Communists and Fascists have a root from Socialism. Shame you liberals are too stupid to know better.

The Road to Serfdom - Wikipedia

which he "[warns] of the danger of tyranny that inevitably results from government control of economic decision-making through central planning."[1] He further argues that the abandonment of individualism and classical liberalism inevitably leads to a loss of freedom, the creation of an oppressive society, the tyranny of a dictator, and the serfdom of the individual. Hayek challenged the general view among British academics that fascism (including National Socialism) was a capitalist reaction against socialism. He argued that fascism, National Socialism and socialism had common roots in central economic planning and empowering the state over the individual.

Liberals are not communists, fascists or socialists. We don't believe in the state over the individual. Take your alternative facts and shove them up your ass!

 

[Billo_Really]

Absolutely. I find the supremecist beliefs of the KKK and groups like them disgusting. Do I think those are the beliefs of most Americans who consider themselves nationalist? no way. That's the fabrication.
But back to the protest. Though the KKK and white supremists are disgusting in their racist beliefs, They had acquired a permit for the march. Did the counter protestors??? I'm not sure, maybe they did.
Now maybe if the Groups who made up "Unite the Right" were so bad, then the city SHOULD HAVE denied them the permit to march.

That was not the case, so it was on the city and the mayor to provide the original marchers access to their route. Freedom of expression is granted even to people you do not agree with in America. Now watching the video, I see the ANTIFA marchers directly impeded a protest march which had a permit to do so. Antifa was just as violent, were you not watching??? The difference is that someone died, but this same violence from the left has been ongoing.

The real problem was with the police here and the city planning. They had to know this would be a powder keg but they allowed direct confrontation.

Those organizers took this country back to Germany in the 1930's. And if you think they can spew racist hatred without any repercussions, then you're lying to yourself. These fuckers need to be condemned every time they shout there bigotry in public.

There can be no tolerance in this country for hatred and racism.

 

[Billo_Really]

Equality really? but you have to be careful hiding behind the premise of equality. The murderous POL POT revolution began as something FOR the people. Basically it was a social justice movement.
Now you have this well meaning leftist movement here in the US and what they do is take American society as a whole and call it unjust, and unequal. I'm white, therefore I am privileged, and by all accounts that is an injustice. I am alive and white and have an unfair advantage, so I must be corrected. That is a microcosm, and just off the top of my head but there are many other things involving political correctness that is being turned into an equality issue.
I'm sorry but I'm seeing this movement as having created a never ending grievance. Today, its a few statues, then it will be all of them. Then it will be changing the names of streets, parks, buildings, etc and it will all have been done in the name of fairness for the people. But what most of us rational people you might call righties are looking at is, where does it stop? who gets to make the definition of what is offensive and what is not offensive? and is one persons offense more righteous than the others? Then you have the silencing and shouting down of opposing viewpoints. That is also very dangerous, because again. Who gets to decide?
I'm against tearing down of these monuments because that in itself is very symbolic of the INTOLERANCE that is taking over this country today. What ever happened to liberals that they want to start the civil war all over again?
Movements like this start out small but end up sowing hatred where it was never necessary to do. Many major genocides in history started out as being for the people. And just because someone calls them self an environmentalist doesn't make them a good person and they can be mentally imbalanced.

Environmentalists try to protect the earth from destruction; white supremacists try to destroy the social fabric of this country. One group is trying to prevent destruction, the other is trying to destroy what isn't them.

And I wouldn't call righties rational. Defending racist groups is not rational. Tolerating hate and bigotry, is not rational. It is also the furthest thing this country is supposed to stand for.

 

[Yarddog]

Again you got one side fighting against a real injustice and the other who made up a lie and is now trying to enforce the lie they have made themselves believe.

One side is fighting for equality and the other side is fighting for supremacy.

Equality really? but you have to be careful hiding behind the premise of equality. The murderous POL POT revolution began as something FOR the people. Basically it was a social justice movement.
Now you have this well meaning leftist movement here in the US and what they do is take American society as a whole and call it unjust, and unequal. I'm white, therefore I am privileged, and by all accounts that is an injustice. I am alive and white and have an unfair advantage, so I must be corrected. That is a microcosm, and just off the top of my head but there are many other things involving political correctness that is being turned into an equality issue.
I'm sorry but I'm seeing this movement as having created a never ending grievance. Today, its a few statues, then it will be all of them. Then it will be changing the names of streets, parks, buildings, etc and it will all have been done in the name of fairness for the people. But what most of us rational people you might call righties are looking at is, where does it stop? who gets to make the definition of what is offensive and what is not offensive? and is one persons offense more righteous than the others? Then you have the silencing and shouting down of opposing viewpoints. That is also very dangerous, because again. Who gets to decide?
I'm against tearing down of these monuments because that in itself is very symbolic of the INTOLERANCE that is taking over this country today. What ever happened to liberals that they want to start the civil war all over again?
Movements like this start out small but end up sowing hatred where it was never necessary to do. Many major genocides in history started out as being for the people. And just because someone calls them self an environmentalist doesn't make them a good person and they can be mentally imbalanced.

There are some truths that you white people just need to accept and work to change. White racism has.been never ending. Until it ends grievances created by it doesn't end. And so what if we take down every statue? We are not to worship graven images in the first place. It's not intolerant to oppose symbols of oppression.on top of that, these statues are getting removed by the vote of the cities removing them. Like I keep saying, we see ZERO statues of Nat Turner. Why?

Because he went on a rampage killing white racist slave owning t rash. To me that's worthy of a statue. He fought slavery in the most literal form. That makes him a hero worthy of a statue of Robert E Lee and any other confederate soldier gets one. But you can't see that. And it's because you think that the only way to look at things is how whites look at is. It's not going to be the only way as long as others besides whites live here.

The citizens of Charlottesville decided the statue of Lee was offensive. They made that determination by the use of the democratic process. At the minimum symbols of slavery be offensive without the dumb ass questions you ask about who determines what is offensive, The racist viewpoint should be shouted down. Racism should be silenced. Are you that entrenched in your racism that you actually believe that you want to fight another civil war?

Then put up a statue of Nat Turner. I'm not going to stop you. There were peaceful protestors there on both sides and the argument on BOTH sides should be heard for not taking down the statues or taking them down. First of all, it is Bullshit that people who want them to remain are racist. Yes, the KKK and white supremecist people who were there are Racist. But you want to call everyone racist who is white and doesn't agree. Your wrong. I'm not calling for civil war either, got no idea where you get that from. The ones who are calling for civil war are the ones resorting to violence in the street because they don't allow each other to talk.
Your side wants to do more than talk people down, they brought bats and other weapons and things to throw at people. The question of who gets to determine what is offensive is not dumb as,s FOOL you wouldn't be saying that if someone found the bust of MLK offensive and demanded to have it taken down. It's an issue of freedom of speech and expression, including things we all find offensive. The ACLU will tell you that all day long if its offensive speech that they support.
I would be happy to protest the KKK any day. I don't agree with anything they stand for. But I would do it peacefully, not bringing weapons, that is not freedom of speech. If you condone either side bringing weapons than YOU are the one promoting civil war. Violence in the street causes people to die, like the woman we saw, and then it escalates. Figure it out. We need to take our country back from people that condone violence whatever their righteous excuse is. unless you want to live in Somalia.
Again. The failure was with whoever this dumb ass mayor was. and the police department who allowed two violent groups to come together.