Another Bigoted Liberal Law Illegally Discriminating Against Only One Religion

mak2 said:
Obese people ordering a fattening cake with sugar and other fattening stuff, then they cram it in each other's faces, then they eat even more and share it with all the other gluttons in attendance. Hell, the fat people even eat it a year later. A direct contribution to sinning. but that isn't a problem for Conservatives.

Where did I mention less fortunate? You need to add to your repertoire of talking points.
Click to expand...

Eating cake does not make you fat, nor does it make you a glutton if you understand moderation. I eat ice cream a couple times a week, but i exercise to offset it
so, also people most often do not celebrate the sin of gluttony, but expect everyone to celebrate the sin of homosexuality, and in this case take part in the sin of celebration.
 
Wolverine said:
Eating cake does not make you fat, nor does it make you a glutton if you understand moderation. I eat ice cream a couple times a week, but i exercise to offset it
so, also people most often do not celebrate the sin of gluttony, but expect everyone to celebrate the sin of homosexuality, and in this case take part in the sin of celebration.
Click to expand...

That is why I specifically noted obese people. Gluttony is a sin, gorging on cake is gluttony. Just pointing out the obvious.
 
Wolverine said:
No they are exercising their right to religious liberty. Which circular argument?
Click to expand...

Their running a business in the secular world, pally boy, not a church camp. There are public accommodation laws that say they can’t discrimate against protected groups. If they want a religious exemption, run it as a 501(c)(3).

That simplE.

I’ve been down this road uncountable times with you “Christian” morons. Why is this simple concept so difficult for you to grasp?
 
domer76 said:
Their running a business in the secular world, pally boy, not a church camp. There are public accommodation laws that say they can’t discrimate against protected groups. If they want a religious exemption, run it as a 501(c)(3).

That simplE.

I’ve been down this road uncountable times with you “Christian” morons. Why is this simple concept so difficult for you to grasp?
Click to expand...

It is not a Christian concept. The conservatives just want to get back to the day they could openly discriminate against "them" people. Oh, the good old days.
 
Wolverine said:
Eating cake does not make you fat, nor does it make you a glutton if you understand moderation. I eat ice cream a couple times a week, but i exercise to offset it
so, also people most often do not celebrate the sin of gluttony, but expect everyone to celebrate the sin of homosexuality, and in this case take part in the sin of celebration.
Click to expand...

Celebrate the sin of homosexuality? Why don't you simply leave gay people alone and let them have the same damned civil rights you enjoy?
 
domer76 said:
Their running a business in the secular world, pally boy, not a church camp. There are public accommodation laws that say they can’t discrimate against protected groups. If they want a religious exemption, run it as a 501(c)(3).

That simplE.

I’ve been down this road uncountable times with you “Christian” morons. Why is this simple concept so difficult for you to grasp?
Click to expand...

Great post..

The problem with this sort of Christians is that at heart they are fascists and can't leave other people in peace. Its liable to backfire on them.
 
domer76 said:
They are using Leviticus as their justification.
Click to expand...

This is far deeper than that. IF they can get to the point they can openly refuse goods and services to gay people, it will be no problem not to sell houses to black people, allow minorities to buy gas in your county to make it more inconvenient for them to even come into the area. As soon as the court rules you can discriminate against the gays, it will be the 60's or maybe worse again.
 
kudzu said:
You appear to be really childish when you invent quotes.

In much the same way that a client can pick a lawyer that they feel comfortable with, the attorney can refuse to represent a client that they don't feel like they can adequately communicate with. There is no obligation for a client to hire a particular attorney or an attorney to represent a particular client.
Click to expand...

what.......is........the.......difference.........(I bet you won't answer this time either).............
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top