Originally posted by Robtard
We've done this already; while I agree with you in theory, I'd prefer not open up the discrimination doors and we go back to a "Whites Only" type of society. Seems rather ugly.
2. Hate to burst your bubble but discrimination already is a thing. The Supreme Court disgustingly defended discrimination in the public sector, ie. college admissions, there are special grants you qualify for based on your skin color, there are even special "blacks only" spaces at some college campuses... again public sector.
3. I don't find it justified to violate people's rights in order to compel moral behavior from them.
Originally posted by Robtard
Show me this law.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
1. That's kind of a boogeyman because that wouldn't happen by and large. Someone doing that would have to cut against the grain of public moral outrage, the media tearing them a new *******, as well as cutting against market interests.2. Hate to burst your bubble but discrimination already is a thing. The Supreme Court disgustingly defended discrimination in the public sector, ie. college admissions, there are special grants you qualify for based on your skin color, there are even special "blacks only" spaces at some college campuses... again public sector.
3. I don't find it justified to violate people's rights in order to compel moral behavior from them.
"It just won't happen" is a bit silly, considering it has already. Cool though.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
1. That's kind of a boogeyman because that wouldn't happen by and large. Someone doing that would have to cut against the grain of public moral outrage, the media tearing them a new *******, as well as cutting against market interests.2. Hate to burst your bubble but discrimination already is a thing. The Supreme Court disgustingly defended discrimination in the public sector, ie. college admissions, there are special grants you qualify for based on your skin color, there are even special "blacks only" spaces at some college campuses... again public sector.
3. I don't find it justified to violate people's rights in order to compel moral behavior from them.
Bingo, especially #2. These folk think discrimination is bad...unless it's discrimination meant to make up for other discrimination.
We put Asians in internment camps and yet...shit all over them lol. "We took your shit and put you in a camp, obviously it made you yearn for a better life, so we're gonna punish you for your good grades."
Originally posted by Surtur
www.google.com
Seems you were talking out of your ass again then
Originally posted by Robtard
Seems you were talking out of your ass again then
Given the number of times I've seen you or your pals respond with "www.google.com" I honestly have no issues with this characterization.
Especially if this will cause you to respond back with a "but it's different when we do it" type response. Love those.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
Should a gay baker be forced to bake a cake for someone ordering it for a Westboro Baptist Church party?
Wait..
If a Christian Baker bakes and decorates a cake in the woods, does the bear shit on it and can you hear the pooping sounds?
I feel like I've messed up the quote...
Ohhh good Old Sethy. He never lets us down.
Seth MacFarlane proves He is a Leftist Shit Head ....Again... aka He is wrong about the cake thing.
Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]Ohhh good Old Sethy. He never lets us down.Seth MacFarlane proves He is a Leftist Shit Head ....Again... aka He is wrong about the cake thing. [/B]
I knew some dipshit would compare it to blacks, it was just a matter of time. Can Seth show me which religion is against blacks?
This question is open to any leftist cuck here who wants to answer.
Originally posted by Surtur
I knew some dipshit would compare it to blacks, it was just a matter of time. Can Seth show me which religion is against blacks?This question is open to any leftist cuck here who wants to answer.
Christianity. Mormonism. Take your pick. Or better yet, pick up a book once in a while and learn something before getting trigg'd.
"Now you are under a curse and driven from the ground, which opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. 12 When you work the ground, it will no longer yield its crops for you. You will be a restless wanderer on the earth.”
13 Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is more than I can bear. 14 Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.”
15 But the Lord said to him, “Not so[a]; anyone who kills Cain will suffer vengeance seven times over.” Then the Lord put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him. 16 So Cain went out from the Lord’s presence and lived in the land of Nod,[b] east of Eden."
Right. Racist.
Originally posted by EmperordmbIt's funny how even though I'm on a generally different part of the political spectrum to you, I generally find myself agreeing more with your points than anyone else here on a regular basis.
1. That's kind of a boogeyman because that wouldn't happen by and large. Someone doing that would have to cut against the grain of public moral outrage, the media tearing them a new *******, as well as cutting against market interests.2. Hate to burst your bubble but discrimination already is a thing. The Supreme Court disgustingly defended discrimination in the public sector, ie. college admissions, there are special grants you qualify for based on your skin color, there are even special "blacks only" spaces at some college campuses... again public sector.
3. I don't find it justified to violate people's rights in order to compel moral behavior from them.
I'd add more but I've been avoiding this part of the forum recently due to the dull partisan shit that is constantly exercised here.
Originally posted by Robtard
We've done this already; while I agree with you in theory, I'd prefer not open up the discrimination doors and we go back to a "Whites Only" type of society. Seems rather ugly.
Hilarious considering that the "Whites Only" type of society was enforced by the government. The government required businesses to be "Whites Only."
Originally posted by Robtard
Where is bigotry under religious reasons protected?Seems rather weird that a Christian baker can go "no gays" but an Atheist baker can't.
He didn't refuse to sell the gay couple a cake. He didn't refuse service and he never turned any customer away due to their sexual orientation, faith, or whatever. The couple could have purchased any item they wanted. The cake maker refused to service to a gay wedding.