[quote=victor809]Shame on you for looking things up.

An interesting set of rulings. Looks like it goes back and forth a bit.
I'd argue the 1943 reversal isn't necessarily applicable as it specifies that it is the free speech clause of the 1st amendment, NOT the religious liberties clause, an important distinction.
[/quote]


Actually those rulings are based on the free exercise clause.

fat people get free stuff..??? 😕

[quote=Abrignac]Actually those rulings are based on the free exercise clause. [/quote]

You wrote the 63 ruling was based on free exercise, and the 43 ruling was free speech.


... don't talk too much about exercise. Drafter may get scared.

I think Abrignac very clearly stated the real issue at hand. Who's rights trump who's. As can be seen in this OP there are strong arguments for both sides. I go back to our forefathers wisdom.

" We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. "

Somehow we need to balance the rights of ALL peoples. This is certainly beyond my comprehension as to how this can be done.

If a gay couple is turned away at the door, it's clearly discrimination. Religion or not.

But if the photographer doesn't want to partake in a same sex ceremony, that's their prerogative. Anything else is coercion.

What if it was a nudist wedding? Or sadists? Or cigar smokers?
That photographer should be able to say no if he simply doesn't like their hat.

Anyone who thinks this law will result in bigots running amok, banning the queens and Jews, is simply so friggin used Uncle Sam propping them up each morning that they become belligerent when facing opposition to more government mandates.

Lighten up.
Indiana won't become an empty hole in the middle of our nation.
At least no more so then they already are.

[quote=tailgater]If a gay couple is turned away at the door, it's clearly discrimination. Religion or not.

But if the photographer doesn't want to partake in a same sex ceremony, that's their prerogative. Anything else is coercion.

What if it was a nudist wedding? Or sadists? Or cigar smokers?
That photographer should be able to say no if he simply doesn't like their hat.

Anyone who thinks this law will result in bigots running amok, banning the queens and Jews, is simply so friggin used Uncle Sam propping them up each morning that they become belligerent when facing opposition to more government mandates.

Lighten up.
Indiana won't become an empty hole in the middle of our nation.
At least no more so then they already are.


[/quote]


Interesting how our HOLE as you put it has remained one of THE most solvent states through the last TWO Administrations......can your HOLE claim the same??? By all means enjoy your hole and leave ours alone.

Funny you should say that.
Boston city council voted to ban trips to IN.

Oh, and you forgot to highlight the part where I said "lighten up "

[quote=tailgater]Funny you should say that.
Boston city council voted to ban trips to IN.

Oh, and you forgot to highlight the part where I said "lighten up "[/quote]



Good.....cause we don't need no Boston City Council A Holes here.....Perhaps you should take the time to have your local political officials to " lighten up "....just a thought

So Indiana doesn't need any tourism or convention business? Maybe that should be added to the state motto. Indiana, stay away because we don't need you or your money whether you like being blown by thinks or not. Have a nice day.

[quote=teedubbya]So Indiana doesn't need any tourism or convention business? Maybe that should be added to the state motto. Indiana, stay away because we don't need you or your money whether you like being blown by thinks or not. Have a nice day. [/quote]



HUH???

Refer to one of my earlier posts where I stated this backlash is nothing short of BLACKMAIL, oh so you don't see things the same way WE do.....we'll boycott your state ( even though we don't live there and only come there because YOU FOLKS in Indiana sure know how to treat people when there for a convention.) But WE know $$$ talks and bull**** walks so we'll simply extort the " end result " we're looking for. GREAT.

Did Than Franthisco get boycotted as they became the bastion of Homosexuality in a country who still shunned it? It is this ultra liberal group using disgusting tactics to further their agenda

[quote=TMCTLT]

Refer to one of my earlier posts where I stated this backlash is nothing short of BLACKMAIL, oh so you don't see things the same way WE do.....we'll boycott your state ( even though we don't live there and only come there because YOU FOLKS in Indiana sure know how to treat people when there for a convention.) But WE know $$$ talks and bull**** walks so we'll simply extort the " end result " we're looking for. GREAT.

Did Than Franthisco get boycotted as they became the bastion of Homosexuality in a country who still shunned it? It is this ultra liberal group using disgusting tactics to further their agenda[/quote]

http://www.cigarbid.com/FORUM/c/posts/636362/It-Pays-to-Know-Your-Customer-Base-So-You-Dont-Pizz-Them-Off 

Yet you seemed pretty pleased about the results of the boycott against Duck Dynasty.....

I get it, it's BLACKMAIL!!!!!!! and disgusting tactics when someone is doing it for a reason you don't like. That's about the stance I'd expect you to take.

It looks like the whole battle is over already with the proposed re-write coming.

GLBT have won and asserted their dominance over religion.

thuper.

funny how sometimes it's blackmail and sometimes its free market.....


the politicians seem to want the people and money from other states. I'd suspect there are very few people that DGAF about that and they are likely on the fringes.

Speaking of fringes do the fringes on my shirt make my butt look big?

[quote=victor809]http://www.cigarbid.com/FORUM/c/posts/636362/It-Pays-to-Know-Your-Customer-Base-So-You-Dont-Pizz-Them-Off

Yet you seemed pretty pleased about the results of the boycott against Duck Dynasty.....

I get it, it's BLACKMAIL!!!!!!! and disgusting tactics when someone is doing it for a reason you don't like. That's about the stance I'd expect you to take. [/quote]





In short the public told us they wouldn't support our stance initially on this issue and well we'd lose a lot of money so we've re thunk it!!


Here's my reply, please show me where I was pleased with the outcome???? This business did what it did over fear of lost income....nothing else. Bringing home the adage of " $$$ really IS the root of all evil.

Cracker Barrel, the same establishment accused of racism against blacks....and you think I support them????

Newsflash, I DON'T

Trying to come up with a different argument once you realized you did in fact post on that thread?

[quote=victor809]Trying to come up with a different argument once you realized you did in fact post on that thread?[/quote]


Yes, and yet there's still nothing there to show that I supported CB's decision to pull their products. I cannot for the life of me given the FACT that there ARE countless businesses out there READY and WILLING to do business with the homosexual community, WHY do they find it necessary to try to FORCE EVERYONE who doesn't see THEIR life choices the same to risk being scrutinized and ultimately ran out of business.

I spent a month in Indiana one night.
Was at a plant and had a few beers with the crew. Met a dude named Gene Pool. Honest.
He didn't understand why that was funny.

[quote=TMCTLT]In short the public told us they wouldn't support our stance initially on this issue and well we'd lose a lot of money so we've re thunk it!!


Here's my reply, please show me where I was pleased with the outcome???? This business did what it did over fear of lost income....nothing else. Bringing home the adage of " $$$ really IS the root of all evil.

Cracker Barrel, the same establishment accused of racism against blacks....and you think I support them????

Newsflash, I DON'T[/quote]

I guess I don't know what goes on in your head. If you tell me you were pissed off that poor network was being forced by viewers to bring back some duck dynasty star through boycotts... then you're the only one to know the truth. But you certainly didn't use the terms BLACKMAIL!!!!! or "disgusting tactics" in that thread.

What about this one?
http://www.cigarbid.com/FORUM/c/posts/636530/Wont-be-watching-the-Rose-Bowl-Parade-- 

You started your own personal boycott of the Rose Bowl, and stated your hope that the network catches hell for some gay marriage thing. What exactly did you mean by "catches hell"? I'm guessing loss of revenue... but again, I don't know what goes on in your little head.

[quote=TMCTLT]Yes, and yet there's still nothing there to show that I supported CB's decision to pull their products. I cannot for the life of me given the FACT that there ARE countless businesses out there READY and WILLING to do business with the homosexual community, WHY do they find it necessary to try to FORCE EVERYONE who doesn't see THEIR life choices the same to risk being scrutinized and ultimately ran out of business.[/quote]

Free market. The people who don't hate homosexuals are greater in number and have more $$ than the people that do hate homosexuals (if you want to use a term different than "hate", feel free, I don't care).

All a boycott is is an organization of spending power. A group of people with the same mindset purposely not buying a product because the person selling it does something they don't like is not fundamentally any different than me individually choosing not to buy a donut from a nazi baker with swastikas in their door. Do you want to force me to buy a donut from the nazi now TCBY?