Woohoo!! GA Gov. vetoes religious liberty bill; Muslims must bake Mohammed cake; Gays must cater too

[aris2chat]

I'm a bit disappointed and relieved at the same time. Georgia needs the revenue, and it's pathetic to see big corporations use their monetary power to influence the political process (Psssst! Liberals! Isn't that something you hate?).

I remember when tolerance used to be a thing; when both sides were required to exercise it and just not one. But I guess that time has passed.

I'm actually torn on this issue. Not the county clerk--she clearly had the choice to find another job. But the baker, jeez, that was sad. However, now that extremists on both sides have forced the issue into the legal sphere, there is no choice I can see but to say businesses can't discriminate. Otherwise, we'd head right down that slippery slope into refusing to serve ..... whomever we don't like.
It's too bad it has to be like this for everyone.

Making this a religious issue not being able morally to make the cake, opened them to legal action.
They could have found a polite way to say no. Instead they make it about the fact the couple were gay.

That is the problem!

If they made it about a black couple, or muslim, the same thing would have happened.

If they refused to sell a women a cake because the way she was dressed or that she did not come with a man, the same thing would have happened.

If a little person came in and the baker wouldn't sell a cake to a child, the same thing would have happened.

Prejudice and hate of other people is wrong. Not very christian either.

 

[hadit]

Will we see the same level of ire directed at Muslim bakeries that refuse to cater gay weddings?

 

[martybegan]

They provide service to a gay wedding. If they don't want to do that, why should their only other option be ruin?

What if they decided that an inter-racial couple is not worthy of their services? What if they decided that a Muslim couple is not worthy? A Jewish couple?

Why should wedding vendors discriminate when they do not and cannot provide a mercantile imperator, a seal of approval from a business confirming the legitimacy of a marriage? Are marriages morally vetted by wedding vendors? Why should discrimination be a protected right? Are we in a time machine transported back to 1955? Are we still shackled by the bigotry of that era?

The bigotry of that era was government mandated, from the State to the Local level. It is not the same as a single or few vendors for a ceremony they do not approve of asking the people to go to someone else. And some vendors only specialize in certain weddings, be it Jewish, Catholic, Black, or anything else. The main issue is there isn't a group of butthurt protected class advocates gunning for them and trying to ruin them. Most black people prefer to use vendors that cater to black culture, and there are other examples with other ethnic groups.

Again, where is the harm? Where is the systemic economic harm (and its corresponding political harm) that these laws were designed to fight in the first place?

In my Christian faith (Presbyterian), the minister has never admonished the congregation to avoid commerce with homosexuals. Avoiding such commerce is not a basic tenet of Christianity. It is, rather, dogma derived from an obscure piece of scripture. Christ Himself never admonished His followers to avoid and decline commerce with anyone. So, a few bigoted folks are using Scripture, twisting it to serve a bad purpose.

And now these bigots want legal protection for their bigotry. Pretty much the same as mandated bigotry.

If these bigots can pervert a loving, forgiving and beautiful faith to serve a vile purpose in one instance, what prevents them from turning their bigotry toward other Americans.

And you said people are 'gunning' for these bigoted merchants. How? By coming into their places of business as paying customers expecting the same high level of service each and every other customer expects? Only to be humiliated and turned away because they do not fit cleanly into the cubby hole some narrow minded bigot demands?

Should. we have second class citizens of this nation? Should a few bigots call the tune? Where was their Scriptural mandate before?

Again, that isn't up to you, me or government to decide unless there is a compelling government interest created by some actual harm.

And by legal protection, you really mean "consideration for the 1st amendment rights vs. the commerce rights of the couple in question", not "you no like gays, you DIE BUNGA BUNGA BUNGA" which is the current standard.

By going into places they know may not want to provide service just to get government to punish them.

Someone loses in any part of this, you want to assume that these people of faith should be 2nd class citizens because simply you don't like their politics.

I might be content if those "people of faith" placed a large sign in their window reading:


DUE TO OUR ABIDING FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST WHO TAUGHT 'JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED' AND 'CAST NOT THE FIRST STONE UNLESS YOU TOO ARE FREE OF SIN' AND 'DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE OTHERS DO UNTO YOU', WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE TO THOSE SKEEVY LITTLE FAGGOTS. IT'S THE CHRISTIAN THING TO DO.

Let them own their bigotry proudly.

Or, we could tone down your own bigotry, and substitute with "This establishment caters to opposite sex weddings only". You can even make them provide a list of competitors.

 

[Nosmo King]

What if they decided that an inter-racial couple is not worthy of their services? What if they decided that a Muslim couple is not worthy? A Jewish couple?

Why should wedding vendors discriminate when they do not and cannot provide a mercantile imperator, a seal of approval from a business confirming the legitimacy of a marriage? Are marriages morally vetted by wedding vendors? Why should discrimination be a protected right? Are we in a time machine transported back to 1955? Are we still shackled by the bigotry of that era?

The bigotry of that era was government mandated, from the State to the Local level. It is not the same as a single or few vendors for a ceremony they do not approve of asking the people to go to someone else. And some vendors only specialize in certain weddings, be it Jewish, Catholic, Black, or anything else. The main issue is there isn't a group of butthurt protected class advocates gunning for them and trying to ruin them. Most black people prefer to use vendors that cater to black culture, and there are other examples with other ethnic groups.

Again, where is the harm? Where is the systemic economic harm (and its corresponding political harm) that these laws were designed to fight in the first place?

In my Christian faith (Presbyterian), the minister has never admonished the congregation to avoid commerce with homosexuals. Avoiding such commerce is not a basic tenet of Christianity. It is, rather, dogma derived from an obscure piece of scripture. Christ Himself never admonished His followers to avoid and decline commerce with anyone. So, a few bigoted folks are using Scripture, twisting it to serve a bad purpose.

And now these bigots want legal protection for their bigotry. Pretty much the same as mandated bigotry.

If these bigots can pervert a loving, forgiving and beautiful faith to serve a vile purpose in one instance, what prevents them from turning their bigotry toward other Americans.

And you said people are 'gunning' for these bigoted merchants. How? By coming into their places of business as paying customers expecting the same high level of service each and every other customer expects? Only to be humiliated and turned away because they do not fit cleanly into the cubby hole some narrow minded bigot demands?

Should. we have second class citizens of this nation? Should a few bigots call the tune? Where was their Scriptural mandate before?

Again, that isn't up to you, me or government to decide unless there is a compelling government interest created by some actual harm.

And by legal protection, you really mean "consideration for the 1st amendment rights vs. the commerce rights of the couple in question", not "you no like gays, you DIE BUNGA BUNGA BUNGA" which is the current standard.

By going into places they know may not want to provide service just to get government to punish them.

Someone loses in any part of this, you want to assume that these people of faith should be 2nd class citizens because simply you don't like their politics.

I might be content if those "people of faith" placed a large sign in their window reading:


DUE TO OUR ABIDING FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST WHO TAUGHT 'JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED' AND 'CAST NOT THE FIRST STONE UNLESS YOU TOO ARE FREE OF SIN' AND 'DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE OTHERS DO UNTO YOU', WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE TO THOSE SKEEVY LITTLE FAGGOTS. IT'S THE CHRISTIAN THING TO DO.

Let them own their bigotry proudly.

Or, we could tone down your own bigotry, and substitute with "This establishment caters to opposite sex weddings only". You can even make them provide a list of competitors.

That would make them more comfortable in their bigotry. I don't believe anyone should seek comfort for bigotry. I don't think anyone should seek protection for their bigotry. I think bigots should be brave enough to open display their bigotry and own it proudly.

 

[martybegan]

The bigotry of that era was government mandated, from the State to the Local level. It is not the same as a single or few vendors for a ceremony they do not approve of asking the people to go to someone else. And some vendors only specialize in certain weddings, be it Jewish, Catholic, Black, or anything else. The main issue is there isn't a group of butthurt protected class advocates gunning for them and trying to ruin them. Most black people prefer to use vendors that cater to black culture, and there are other examples with other ethnic groups.

Again, where is the harm? Where is the systemic economic harm (and its corresponding political harm) that these laws were designed to fight in the first place?

In my Christian faith (Presbyterian), the minister has never admonished the congregation to avoid commerce with homosexuals. Avoiding such commerce is not a basic tenet of Christianity. It is, rather, dogma derived from an obscure piece of scripture. Christ Himself never admonished His followers to avoid and decline commerce with anyone. So, a few bigoted folks are using Scripture, twisting it to serve a bad purpose.

And now these bigots want legal protection for their bigotry. Pretty much the same as mandated bigotry.

If these bigots can pervert a loving, forgiving and beautiful faith to serve a vile purpose in one instance, what prevents them from turning their bigotry toward other Americans.

And you said people are 'gunning' for these bigoted merchants. How? By coming into their places of business as paying customers expecting the same high level of service each and every other customer expects? Only to be humiliated and turned away because they do not fit cleanly into the cubby hole some narrow minded bigot demands?

Should. we have second class citizens of this nation? Should a few bigots call the tune? Where was their Scriptural mandate before?

Again, that isn't up to you, me or government to decide unless there is a compelling government interest created by some actual harm.

And by legal protection, you really mean "consideration for the 1st amendment rights vs. the commerce rights of the couple in question", not "you no like gays, you DIE BUNGA BUNGA BUNGA" which is the current standard.

By going into places they know may not want to provide service just to get government to punish them.

Someone loses in any part of this, you want to assume that these people of faith should be 2nd class citizens because simply you don't like their politics.

I might be content if those "people of faith" placed a large sign in their window reading:


DUE TO OUR ABIDING FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST WHO TAUGHT 'JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED' AND 'CAST NOT THE FIRST STONE UNLESS YOU TOO ARE FREE OF SIN' AND 'DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE OTHERS DO UNTO YOU', WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE TO THOSE SKEEVY LITTLE FAGGOTS. IT'S THE CHRISTIAN THING TO DO.

Let them own their bigotry proudly.

Or, we could tone down your own bigotry, and substitute with "This establishment caters to opposite sex weddings only". You can even make them provide a list of competitors.

That would make them more comfortable in their bigotry. I don't believe anyone should seek comfort for bigotry. I don't think anyone should seek protection for their bigotry. I think bigots should be brave enough to open display their bigotry and own it proudly.

And then let government crush them into the ground, right?

 

[Nosmo King]

In my Christian faith (Presbyterian), the minister has never admonished the congregation to avoid commerce with homosexuals. Avoiding such commerce is not a basic tenet of Christianity. It is, rather, dogma derived from an obscure piece of scripture. Christ Himself never admonished His followers to avoid and decline commerce with anyone. So, a few bigoted folks are using Scripture, twisting it to serve a bad purpose.

And now these bigots want legal protection for their bigotry. Pretty much the same as mandated bigotry.

If these bigots can pervert a loving, forgiving and beautiful faith to serve a vile purpose in one instance, what prevents them from turning their bigotry toward other Americans.

And you said people are 'gunning' for these bigoted merchants. How? By coming into their places of business as paying customers expecting the same high level of service each and every other customer expects? Only to be humiliated and turned away because they do not fit cleanly into the cubby hole some narrow minded bigot demands?

Should. we have second class citizens of this nation? Should a few bigots call the tune? Where was their Scriptural mandate before?

Again, that isn't up to you, me or government to decide unless there is a compelling government interest created by some actual harm.

And by legal protection, you really mean "consideration for the 1st amendment rights vs. the commerce rights of the couple in question", not "you no like gays, you DIE BUNGA BUNGA BUNGA" which is the current standard.

By going into places they know may not want to provide service just to get government to punish them.

Someone loses in any part of this, you want to assume that these people of faith should be 2nd class citizens because simply you don't like their politics.

I might be content if those "people of faith" placed a large sign in their window reading:


DUE TO OUR ABIDING FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST WHO TAUGHT 'JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED' AND 'CAST NOT THE FIRST STONE UNLESS YOU TOO ARE FREE OF SIN' AND 'DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE OTHERS DO UNTO YOU', WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE TO THOSE SKEEVY LITTLE FAGGOTS. IT'S THE CHRISTIAN THING TO DO.

Let them own their bigotry proudly.

Or, we could tone down your own bigotry, and substitute with "This establishment caters to opposite sex weddings only". You can even make them provide a list of competitors.

That would make them more comfortable in their bigotry. I don't believe anyone should seek comfort for bigotry. I don't think anyone should seek protection for their bigotry. I think bigots should be brave enough to open display their bigotry and own it proudly.

And then let government crush them into the ground, right?

The beloved Free Market will do that.

 

[Asclepias]

In my Christian faith (Presbyterian), the minister has never admonished the congregation to avoid commerce with homosexuals. Avoiding such commerce is not a basic tenet of Christianity. It is, rather, dogma derived from an obscure piece of scripture. Christ Himself never admonished His followers to avoid and decline commerce with anyone. So, a few bigoted folks are using Scripture, twisting it to serve a bad purpose.

And now these bigots want legal protection for their bigotry. Pretty much the same as mandated bigotry.

If these bigots can pervert a loving, forgiving and beautiful faith to serve a vile purpose in one instance, what prevents them from turning their bigotry toward other Americans.

And you said people are 'gunning' for these bigoted merchants. How? By coming into their places of business as paying customers expecting the same high level of service each and every other customer expects? Only to be humiliated and turned away because they do not fit cleanly into the cubby hole some narrow minded bigot demands?

Should. we have second class citizens of this nation? Should a few bigots call the tune? Where was their Scriptural mandate before?

Again, that isn't up to you, me or government to decide unless there is a compelling government interest created by some actual harm.

And by legal protection, you really mean "consideration for the 1st amendment rights vs. the commerce rights of the couple in question", not "you no like gays, you DIE BUNGA BUNGA BUNGA" which is the current standard.

By going into places they know may not want to provide service just to get government to punish them.

Someone loses in any part of this, you want to assume that these people of faith should be 2nd class citizens because simply you don't like their politics.

I might be content if those "people of faith" placed a large sign in their window reading:


DUE TO OUR ABIDING FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST WHO TAUGHT 'JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED' AND 'CAST NOT THE FIRST STONE UNLESS YOU TOO ARE FREE OF SIN' AND 'DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE OTHERS DO UNTO YOU', WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE TO THOSE SKEEVY LITTLE FAGGOTS. IT'S THE CHRISTIAN THING TO DO.

Let them own their bigotry proudly.

Or, we could tone down your own bigotry, and substitute with "This establishment caters to opposite sex weddings only". You can even make them provide a list of competitors.

That would make them more comfortable in their bigotry. I don't believe anyone should seek comfort for bigotry. I don't think anyone should seek protection for their bigotry. I think bigots should be brave enough to open display their bigotry and own it proudly.

And then let government crush them into the ground, right?

Exactly. They need to be crushed (or fined) and the government elected by the people will see to it.

 

[martybegan]

Again, that isn't up to you, me or government to decide unless there is a compelling government interest created by some actual harm.

And by legal protection, you really mean "consideration for the 1st amendment rights vs. the commerce rights of the couple in question", not "you no like gays, you DIE BUNGA BUNGA BUNGA" which is the current standard.

By going into places they know may not want to provide service just to get government to punish them.

Someone loses in any part of this, you want to assume that these people of faith should be 2nd class citizens because simply you don't like their politics.

I might be content if those "people of faith" placed a large sign in their window reading:


DUE TO OUR ABIDING FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST WHO TAUGHT 'JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED' AND 'CAST NOT THE FIRST STONE UNLESS YOU TOO ARE FREE OF SIN' AND 'DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE OTHERS DO UNTO YOU', WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE TO THOSE SKEEVY LITTLE FAGGOTS. IT'S THE CHRISTIAN THING TO DO.

Let them own their bigotry proudly.

Or, we could tone down your own bigotry, and substitute with "This establishment caters to opposite sex weddings only". You can even make them provide a list of competitors.

That would make them more comfortable in their bigotry. I don't believe anyone should seek comfort for bigotry. I don't think anyone should seek protection for their bigotry. I think bigots should be brave enough to open display their bigotry and own it proudly.

And then let government crush them into the ground, right?

The beloved Free Market will do that.

Fine, then you support repeal of PA laws, right? or at least adding a test to them when it comes to contracted services that takes into account the 1st amendment rights of those in question, right?

 

[martybegan]

Again, that isn't up to you, me or government to decide unless there is a compelling government interest created by some actual harm.

And by legal protection, you really mean "consideration for the 1st amendment rights vs. the commerce rights of the couple in question", not "you no like gays, you DIE BUNGA BUNGA BUNGA" which is the current standard.

By going into places they know may not want to provide service just to get government to punish them.

Someone loses in any part of this, you want to assume that these people of faith should be 2nd class citizens because simply you don't like their politics.

I might be content if those "people of faith" placed a large sign in their window reading:


DUE TO OUR ABIDING FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST WHO TAUGHT 'JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED' AND 'CAST NOT THE FIRST STONE UNLESS YOU TOO ARE FREE OF SIN' AND 'DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE OTHERS DO UNTO YOU', WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE TO THOSE SKEEVY LITTLE FAGGOTS. IT'S THE CHRISTIAN THING TO DO.

Let them own their bigotry proudly.

Or, we could tone down your own bigotry, and substitute with "This establishment caters to opposite sex weddings only". You can even make them provide a list of competitors.

That would make them more comfortable in their bigotry. I don't believe anyone should seek comfort for bigotry. I don't think anyone should seek protection for their bigotry. I think bigots should be brave enough to open display their bigotry and own it proudly.

And then let government crush them into the ground, right?

Exactly. They need to be crushed (or fined) and the government elected by the people will see to it.

And another flavor of bigot decides to enter the fray.

 

[Asclepias]

I might be content if those "people of faith" placed a large sign in their window reading:


DUE TO OUR ABIDING FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST WHO TAUGHT 'JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED' AND 'CAST NOT THE FIRST STONE UNLESS YOU TOO ARE FREE OF SIN' AND 'DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE OTHERS DO UNTO YOU', WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE TO THOSE SKEEVY LITTLE FAGGOTS. IT'S THE CHRISTIAN THING TO DO.

Let them own their bigotry proudly.

Or, we could tone down your own bigotry, and substitute with "This establishment caters to opposite sex weddings only". You can even make them provide a list of competitors.

That would make them more comfortable in their bigotry. I don't believe anyone should seek comfort for bigotry. I don't think anyone should seek protection for their bigotry. I think bigots should be brave enough to open display their bigotry and own it proudly.

And then let government crush them into the ground, right?

Exactly. They need to be crushed (or fined) and the government elected by the people will see to it.

And another flavor of bigot decides to enter the fray.

There is no fray. The inbreds that cant understand PA laws will be punished. Its really that simple.

 

[martybegan]

Or, we could tone down your own bigotry, and substitute with "This establishment caters to opposite sex weddings only". You can even make them provide a list of competitors.

That would make them more comfortable in their bigotry. I don't believe anyone should seek comfort for bigotry. I don't think anyone should seek protection for their bigotry. I think bigots should be brave enough to open display their bigotry and own it proudly.

And then let government crush them into the ground, right?

Exactly. They need to be crushed (or fined) and the government elected by the people will see to it.

And another flavor of bigot decides to enter the fray.

There is no fray. The inbreds that cant understand PA laws will be punished. Its really that simple.

Bigot.

 

[Asclepias]

That would make them more comfortable in their bigotry. I don't believe anyone should seek comfort for bigotry. I don't think anyone should seek protection for their bigotry. I think bigots should be brave enough to open display their bigotry and own it proudly.

And then let government crush them into the ground, right?

Exactly. They need to be crushed (or fined) and the government elected by the people will see to it.

And another flavor of bigot decides to enter the fray.

There is no fray. The inbreds that cant understand PA laws will be punished. Its really that simple.

Bigot.

Dont be so emotional. If you open your store to the public you will absolutely obey the rules or be punished. If you cant deal with that....well thats really your issue.

 

[Nosmo King]

I might be content if those "people of faith" placed a large sign in their window reading:


DUE TO OUR ABIDING FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST WHO TAUGHT 'JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED' AND 'CAST NOT THE FIRST STONE UNLESS YOU TOO ARE FREE OF SIN' AND 'DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE OTHERS DO UNTO YOU', WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE TO THOSE SKEEVY LITTLE FAGGOTS. IT'S THE CHRISTIAN THING TO DO.

Let them own their bigotry proudly.

Or, we could tone down your own bigotry, and substitute with "This establishment caters to opposite sex weddings only". You can even make them provide a list of competitors.

That would make them more comfortable in their bigotry. I don't believe anyone should seek comfort for bigotry. I don't think anyone should seek protection for their bigotry. I think bigots should be brave enough to open display their bigotry and own it proudly.

And then let government crush them into the ground, right?

The beloved Free Market will do that.

Fine, then you support repeal of PA laws, right? or at least adding a test to them when it comes to contracted services that takes into account the 1st amendment rights of those in question, right?

If businesses don't want to comply laws, let them post a sign in their front windows proclaiming their reasoning proudly and boldly. e.g.

ABSOLUTELY NO ******* SERVED HERE!

NO TOWEL HEADS, NO MUSLIMS, NO EXCEPTIONS!

NO INFIDELS!

\

 

[martybegan]

And then let government crush them into the ground, right?

Exactly. They need to be crushed (or fined) and the government elected by the people will see to it.

And another flavor of bigot decides to enter the fray.

There is no fray. The inbreds that cant understand PA laws will be punished. Its really that simple.

Bigot.

Dont be so emotional. If you open your store to the public you will absolutely obey the rules or be punished. If you cant deal with that....well thats really your issue.

Again, we aren't talking walk in transactions, but contracted services or goods for an event.

 

[martybegan]

Or, we could tone down your own bigotry, and substitute with "This establishment caters to opposite sex weddings only". You can even make them provide a list of competitors.

That would make them more comfortable in their bigotry. I don't believe anyone should seek comfort for bigotry. I don't think anyone should seek protection for their bigotry. I think bigots should be brave enough to open display their bigotry and own it proudly.

And then let government crush them into the ground, right?

The beloved Free Market will do that.

Fine, then you support repeal of PA laws, right? or at least adding a test to them when it comes to contracted services that takes into account the 1st amendment rights of those in question, right?

If businesses don't want to comply laws, let them post a sign in their front windows proclaiming their reasoning proudly and boldly. e.g.

ABSOLUTELY NO ******* SERVED HERE!

NO TOWEL HEADS, NO MUSLIMS, NO EXCEPTIONS!

NO INFIDELS!

\

We don't cater to "X" events is more than enough.

 

[Katzndogz]

Bake the damn cake and fuck up the whole wedding.

 

[Asclepias]

Exactly. They need to be crushed (or fined) and the government elected by the people will see to it.

And another flavor of bigot decides to enter the fray.

There is no fray. The inbreds that cant understand PA laws will be punished. Its really that simple.

Bigot.

Dont be so emotional. If you open your store to the public you will absolutely obey the rules or be punished. If you cant deal with that....well thats really your issue.

Again, we aren't talking walk in transactions, but contracted services or goods for an event.

I dont care what type of transactions you are talking about. If its offered to the public you will comply or be fined, shutdown, or sued. You dont have a choice.

 

[Nosmo King]

That would make them more comfortable in their bigotry. I don't believe anyone should seek comfort for bigotry. I don't think anyone should seek protection for their bigotry. I think bigots should be brave enough to open display their bigotry and own it proudly.

And then let government crush them into the ground, right?

The beloved Free Market will do that.

Fine, then you support repeal of PA laws, right? or at least adding a test to them when it comes to contracted services that takes into account the 1st amendment rights of those in question, right?

If businesses don't want to comply laws, let them post a sign in their front windows proclaiming their reasoning proudly and boldly. e.g.

ABSOLUTELY NO ******* SERVED HERE!

NO TOWEL HEADS, NO MUSLIMS, NO EXCEPTIONS!

NO INFIDELS!

\

We don't cater to "X" events is more than enough.

]NO COMFORT, NO PROTECTIONS, NO SOLACE OR VALIDATION FOR BIGOTS. if THEY ARE BIGOTS, LET THEM SHOW IT PROUDLY.

 

[martybegan]

And another flavor of bigot decides to enter the fray.

There is no fray. The inbreds that cant understand PA laws will be punished. Its really that simple.

Bigot.

Dont be so emotional. If you open your store to the public you will absolutely obey the rules or be punished. If you cant deal with that....well thats really your issue.

Again, we aren't talking walk in transactions, but contracted services or goods for an event.

I dont care what type of transactions you are talking about. If its offered to the public you will comply or be fined, shutdown, or sued. You dont have a choice.

The law is being wrongly applied.

 

[martybegan]

And then let government crush them into the ground, right?

The beloved Free Market will do that.

Fine, then you support repeal of PA laws, right? or at least adding a test to them when it comes to contracted services that takes into account the 1st amendment rights of those in question, right?

If businesses don't want to comply laws, let them post a sign in their front windows proclaiming their reasoning proudly and boldly. e.g.

ABSOLUTELY NO ******* SERVED HERE!

NO TOWEL HEADS, NO MUSLIMS, NO EXCEPTIONS!

NO INFIDELS!

\

We don't cater to "X" events is more than enough.

]NO COMFORT, NO PROTECTIONS, NO SOLACE OR VALIDATION FOR BIGOTS. if THEY ARE BIGOTS, LET THEM SHOW IT PROUDLY.

Cap's doesn't make you any smarter, in fact, thank you for losing the argument.