Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...the Energy Department has announced a new fuel-efficient-vehicle loan—a $259 million conditional award to Alcoa. It’s a pretty sweet deal: The Energy Department touts on its website how this loan program “offers attractive financing for U.S. auto industry,” including no application fees, a closing fee of just 0.1 percent, and interest rates estimated at no more than 4 percent.
Of course, one might wonder why a company like Alcoa, which brought in $23.9 billion in revenue last year, needs government (read: taxpayer) help.
But it turns out Alcoa has major Obama administration ties.
"Freedom" to engage in trade with anyone but gays?
"Freedom" to engage in trade with anyone but blacks?
"Freedom" to engage in trade with anyone but women?
"Freedom" to engage in trade with anyone but Jews?
Sorry, but "Freedom" to engage in trade comes with the RESPONSIBILITY to engage in trade with ANYONE - including people you may not approve of.
"Freedom" is not - and never was - the "Freedom" to do "whatever I want".
Ken
So then why can't I go to Curves fitness center and sign up for a membership? Clearly they're infringing on my rights, since they have a "responsibility" to do business with me no matter what right? As you said above, people cannot be denied based on gender.
There is a group on TV right now with their own show that have a religious polygamist marriage. They are not in jail. It is not illegal for them to have a wedding in their yard declaring themselves married.
Because nobody is bothering to prosecute. The laws haven't changed since the anti-Mormon Crusades. Everything is still in place for an all-out assault on any polygamist organization of any kind, especially if they are in Utah. How else do you think the following was even possible?
Like I said, it already happened before. It can happen again. And it's a lot easier to do it under the banner of anti-discrimination.
Frankly, I was shocked that the lawsuit against the Knapps wasn't just thrown out of court. Taking legal action against individuals refusing to perform a gay marriage is a very short hop away from prosecuting entire religions. Weren't the Knapps ordained ministers in the first place? Wouldn't that fact have protected them? Apparently it didn't.
So then why can't I go to Curves fitness center and sign up for a membership? Clearly they're infringing on my rights, since they have a "responsibility" to do business with me no matter what right? As you said above, people cannot be denied based on gender.
You SHOULD be able to do that. If you want to join Curves go ahead and sue them.
So then why can't I go to Curves fitness center and sign up for a membership? Clearly they're infringing on my rights, since they have a "responsibility" to do business with me no matter what right? As you said above, people cannot be denied based on gender.
What does Membership only participating clubs, businesses i.e. Costco have NOTHING to do with this? NOTHING..Boy's club.who only allow card carrying members men only patronage..LEGAL..If you want to get the benefit of their "Club Only" benefits..Then all you have to is purchase a membership..Voila..free to shop your brains out..
Because nobody is bothering to prosecute. The laws haven't changed since the anti-Mormon Crusades. Everything is still in place for an all-out assault on any polygamist organization of any kind, especially if they are in Utah. How else do you think the following was even possible?
Like I said, it already happened before. It can happen again. And it's a lot easier to do it under the banner of anti-discrimination.
Frankly, I was shocked that the lawsuit against the Knapps wasn't just thrown out of court. Taking legal action against individuals refusing to perform a gay marriage is a very short hop away from prosecuting entire religions. Weren't the Knapps ordained ministers in the first place? Wouldn't that fact have protected them? Apparently it didn't.
Twenty people living in the same house is not illegal. Neither is saying that you are married.
The Knapps were ministers, but they were operating a business.
A preacher that has a construction company is running a business, and has to follow the laws of operating a business.
The Knapps changed their business to a religious org, to get around the issue.
What does Membership only participating clubs, businesses i.e. Costco have NOTHING to do with this?
I've read this line a couple times and it still doesn't make any sense. I guess you're saying that businesses such as Curves are free to discriminate because a membership is required? So liberals are OK with a business not selling a membership to people based on their gender/race/etc? How is that not totally hypocritical?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
