(no subject)

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/313613

Second amendment rights. But only for Christians and McCain voters.

This is really dumb, and I'd like to see everyone in this comm agree that the owner of this store is violating the law and discriminating unjustly. That is my view, if there is another view out there, please, share it with me.

Comments

[chessdev.livejournal.com]

It's interesting how often conservatives scream about

"The war on Christmas" or "The war on our culture"....

but then we see crap like this clown, who blatantly declares open
disdain on other cultures and beliefs.


And where I disagree with you is that the places of business are licensed by the State, and part of the conditions of that permission to operate and serve the public is that they serve them equally unless some special circumstance arises.

Free Association does not trump equal treatment -- otherwise the 14th amendment, and even Civil Rights legislation would have no meaning.

Let's not put the individual on such a pedestal that we allow an individual to abuse groups of people, and congratulate them for doing so at the same time

[jerseycajun.livejournal.com]

There is no choice but to be licensed by the state. No room has been left for freedom of association to go.

And the fourteenth amendment reiterates repeatedly how it applies to.. well, how laws are applied. These institutions under discussion are not instruments of the law nor are they extensions of it. The are public in the social sense, not the legal sense, and social arrangements are based on mt

Look, I understand where the desire for this comes from, but I reiterate that if an establishment owner is a fervent anti-Catholic (to make the example a personal one to me), I would rather that be made known to me plainly rather than he be forced to conceal all external prejudice, see the ash on my forehead on Ash Wednesday, and surreptitiously hock a loogie in my tuna salad sandwich. Using the law to conceal prejudice does not remove it or what it will motivate the prejudiced to do. It will merely change the expression of it.

[lilenth.livejournal.com]

There is a choice, getting a different job if theirs is incompatible with their desires.

[jerseycajun.livejournal.com]

Or they can comply and I get a secret loogie in my lunch.

[chessdev.livejournal.com]

People can FEEL however they like

but they cannot act against other people discriminatively.
Its not about changing feelings, but external behaviors.

You're missing that the "harm" of discrimination moves beyond just the individual, especially in scenarios of denying services/goods/loans or whatever based on subjective and personal criteria.