Originally posted by Playmaker
And there's a reason that Jim Crow had to be law in the South. Because other shopkeepers would simply serve people that someone else refused to do business with. If you don't want to serve blacks at your store. Fine. Someone else will gladly do so and accept their money.
This is how Black Wall Street was born and they had better schools, streets, public schools, and hospitals before the Tulsa Race Riots broke out and burned it all down because they were jealous that a black man could do better than a white man.
Originally posted by SquallX
Yet when a Muslims refuses to bake a cake for a gay couple, the left is so quiet, you can hear the crickets miles away.Good job on being selective in your outrage.
No lawsuits, either.
Any time I see a stupid lawsuit, like an atheist father of two sending his atheist daughter and son to the Scouts, and filing a lawsuit when they predictably demand recognition of God, as they always have, I assume "Money grab".
But as you pointed out, no one is going after Muslim bakers. Which in this case, makes you wonder if the lawsuits were about something more then "easy money", or even "justice".
Originally posted by Robtard
The baker's intent was to be bigoted against people because they're gay. I've said I'm cool with it now, let people be bigoted and deny services based on bigoted views.Doesn't mean I have to personally like it.
That's my same exact position. 👆
Just be sure and leave a Yelp or Google review when you visit shitty places like that. Vote with your voice and your dollars the way capitalism intended. 🙂
Originally posted by SquallX
Yet when a Muslims refuses to bake a cake for a gay couple, the left is so quiet, you can hear the crickets miles away.Good job on being selective in your outrage.
The worst case is if a Transgeder Muslim refuses to bake a cake for a Gay Native American Jew because the Muslim doesn't endorse homosexuality.
It will cause the libtards to implode.
Originally posted by dadudemon
The worst case is if a Transgeder Muslim refuses to bake a cake for a Gay Native American Jew because the Muslim doesn't endorse homosexuality.It will cause the libtards to implode.
Nah, they'd just ignore it entirely, while The Blaze reports it to crickets and Surtur.
Alternatively: Use "No true scottsman" fallacy on one, and spin it against the Right.
Originally posted by dadudemon1. SHS used her public office for private gain - his first tweet. Specifically, 5 CFR 2635.702(a), talks about coercing a business to do an action
[/B]
This:
"talks about coercing a business to do an action because of her political office."
Doesn't necessarily equate to this:
"used her public office for private gain"
You don't have to coerce for private gain.
You may well be right on the other fronts, but you don't need to privately benefit to coerce someone.
Originally posted by DarthPlaguis12
I read the owner of the red hen followed Sanders family who went to a place across the street n kept hartassing them, gathering a crowd.Now the idiot has been forced to close her business for a while.
Well that's very shitty then, should have ended once that trashbag Sarah H. Sanders left the restaurant. Bad move on the Red Hen owner.
But it that all actually true? Is there actual proof? Is the Cult of Trump falling for fake news again?
Originally posted by SquallX
Yet when a Muslims refuses to bake a cake for a gay couple, the left is so quiet, you can hear the crickets miles away.
But do continue your witch hunt.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Maybe because:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/04/politics/masterpiece-colorado-gay-marriage-cake-supreme-court/index.htmlBut do continue your witch hunt.
The point just flew over your head huh?
Play dumb if it makes you sleep better at night.
Yup I was right...
...And he was in Germany when he did it! lol
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Maybe because:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/04/politics/masterpiece-colorado-gay-marriage-cake-supreme-court/index.htmlBut do continue your witch hunt.
Speaking of witch hunts:
The ruling, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, held that members of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission showed animus toward Phillips specifically when they suggested his claims of religious freedom were made to justify discrimination.
Not good. Makes it sound like the Colorado Civil Rights commission had a personal axe to grind against Christians.
At least, the judge seemed to think so.