WakeBDer
Broderick Hicks
But you want them to be allowed to discriminate. What if they don't go out of business?
I'm sure that will happen in some communities. How do you think they should be punished?
But you want them to be allowed to discriminate. What if they don't go out of business?
No he doesn't. He wants the SCOTUS to rule on the legality of it by weighing the constitutional rights of each party involved.
.
This should be an easy 9-0 vote against the baker. But it's possible this bigot could win. Yes, you are a bigot if you refuse to serve someone because of who they are.
I'm sure that will happen in some communities. How do you think they should be punished?
He said this:
"Of course not. I want bigots to go out of business if they choose to discriminate through their business practices."
That shows he wants bigots to be allowed to discriminate. He can try to dance around this, but he said they should be able to "choose to discriminate through their business practices".
He said this:
"Of course not. I want bigots to go out of business if they choose to discriminate through their business practices."
That shows he wants bigots to be allowed to discriminate. He can try to dance around this, but he said they should be able to "choose to discriminate through their business practices".
This is pretty much what everyone disagrees with you about. It's not simple or easy.
Do you believe in the long standing SC rulings on public accommodations? If so, it is simple.
Do you believe in the long standing SC rulings on public accommodations? If so, it is simple.
Then why is it going to the SCOTUS if it's simple?
Just because I think someone is a bigot doesn't mean that I don't think they should be allowed to think the things they think and act appropriately within legal guidelines. My worldview doesn't have to be everyone's worldview.
Then why is it going to the SCOTUS if it's simple?
I have never said that person can't be a bigot. He has every right to be a bigot. But if that bigotry breaks the laws, like public accommodation, he doesn't have the right to act on his bigotry.
He can deny entry to his home to anyone he chooses. He can choose not go to stores that are owned by gays. He can choose not to go to Jewish doctors. I have no problem with any of those choices or him holding bigoted beliefs.
However, if he's open for business for the public. He has to serve the public.
As to the red part, you just contradicted you own previous post. You said, "Of course not. I want bigots to go out of business if they choose to discriminate through their business practices."
It is clearly illegal to discriminate in many situations.
Which of your posts is real?
Is it your first one that says we should allow bigots to break the law? Remember your response was to my specifically posted about the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and public accommodation rulings.
Or should we believe your second posts that says businesses and people must follow the law?
You have taken both sides.
As has been acknowledged, we don't have a standing on public accommodation w/r/t and sexual orientation. People should follow the law whatever it is after we have a ruling from the Supreme Court.
As a gay married person, this is just not very important at all.