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 correct ruling is simply to say that if you serve the public, you have to serve everyone.
In other words, if you serve everyone, you have to serve everyone. Well, these bakers didn't serve everyone, so how do you figure they were serving "the public"?
I hope the Supreme Court affirms the lower court decision.
It is well established law that if you operate a business serving the public that you can't discriminate against minorities, or anyone based on their race or their sex.
I'm sure it's been posted several times in this thread, but I'll say it once more because it obviously isn't getting through. The bakers were fined because they published the names and addresses of the couple online, which resulted in them receiving death threats and threats of violence from other Christians. That's what the damages were awarded for.
I'm sure it's been posted several times in this thread, but I'll say it once more because it obviously isn't getting through. The bakers were fined because they published the names and addresses of the couple online, which resulted in them receiving death threats and threats of violence from other Christians. That's what the damages were awarded for.
They may have done that, but the couple didn't get any money for that.
Actually, they can as LGBTs have no protections under the Federal Civil Rights Act, and state law CANNOT supercede Constitutional Rights (Supremacy Clause, Article VI).
Then it is time for congress to add LGBTs to the Federal Civil Rights Act so they can have the same protections. Wouldn't you agree?
Then it is time for congress to add LGBTs to the Federal Civil Rights Act so they can have the same protections. Wouldn't you agree?
Ask Congress WHY they've had several chances to do so and have ALWAYS declined. Not even Pelosi and Reid could pass a bill to add LGBT to the Federal Civil Rights Act.
Ask Congress WHY they've had several chances to do so and have ALWAYS declined. Not even Pelosi and Reid could pass a bill to add LGBT to the Federal Civil Rights Act.
I'm asking you. Do you think the LGBT community should be protected against discrimination?
You have an opinion, don't you? You are afraid to give your opinion, that speaks volumes!
My opinion doesn't matter. What's holding things up is that LGBTs can't get Congress's support. Every time a bill to add LGBT as a protected class under the Federal Civil Rights Act is introduced in Congress, it fails. Every time.
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.
