No, I don't. I wouldn't find it said if I went to a restaurant where they didn't serve what I wanted, either.
Went to a local, good home cooking restaurant about 10 years ago. 15 of us. Slow time of day. Waitress said we could move 3 tables together. We did.
Owner came out and bitched about it. We ate, and my mom and dad haven't been back, and I've been there twice, with that though always in my head: They wanted our business THEIR way.
Should I have, or my parents, sued them? No. Shut up, and take your business elsewhere.
Really, because in your opinion your hate and bigotry about Freddie Kitchens was posted for all to see.
Your credibility when it comes to hate and bigotry is nil.
An unrelated topic that has nothing to do with my post above. You just want to attack me for the sake of attacking me. He sounded like a hick the day I said that. A backwoods hick who had no business being made HC of the Browns. He's grown on me since, but he still has to prove himself as a HC.
You're butt sore over my feelings about how he presented himself 'in my opinion' and the fact that I spoke up. Well, I don't care how that made you feel or how you took it. And I don't think a white hillbilly calling a white southerner a hick is in any way, shape, or form bigotry OR hate. So go get a life.
Really, because in your opinion your hate and bigotry about Freddie Kitchens was posted for all to see.
Your credibility when it comes to hate and bigotry is nil.
An unrelated topic that has nothing to do with my post above. You just want to attack me for the sake of attacking me. He sounded like a hick the day I said that. A backwoods hick who had no business being made HC of the Browns. He's grown on me since, but he still has to prove himself as a HC.
You're butt sore over my feelings about how he presented himself 'in my opinion' and the fact that I spoke up. well, I don't care how that made you feel or how you took it. And I don't think a white hillbilly calling a white southerner a hick is in anyway shape or form bigotry OR hate. So go get a life.
Insert black person in your narrative above.
And then go tell us some more about how youre not a bigot.
Really, because in your opinion your hate and bigotry about Freddie Kitchens was posted for all to see.
Your credibility when it comes to hate and bigotry is nil.
An unrelated topic that has nothing to do with my post above. You just want to attack me for the sake of attacking me. He sounded like a hick the day I said that. A backwoods hick who had no business being made HC of the Browns. He's grown on me since, but he still has to prove himself as a HC.
You're butt sore over my feelings about how he presented himself 'in my opinion' and the fact that I spoke up. well, I don't care how that made you feel or how you took it. And I don't think a white hillbilly calling a white southerner a hick is in anyway shape or form bigotry OR hate. So go get a life.
Insert black person in your narrative above.
And then go tell us some more about how youre not a bigot.
What I said was not at all racial. But you keep trying to make it racial. When did southern hick become a race? You sound foolish.
I haven't followed this thread and just read the last 10 posts or so. Thus, I may be way off base....but, that won't stop me from opening my big mouth anyway.
1. I would not refuse to serve or patronize any business, establishment, etc due to a person's sexual, cultural, religious, etc persuasion.
2. If someone did not want to hire me or serve me because of the same criteria.....I would gladly take my business elsewhere because no way would I want to work for or give money to a bigot.
Conclusion: It's sad that we live in a world that is clinging to championing differences instead of us simply accepting our differences as a vessel to make this world a more interesting place to live.
Disclaimer: The only caveat I would add to this is I have no problem admitting that would not support militant groups that preach hate and want to hurt others who are not like them. I don't care what "side" they represent. I have little tolerance for folks who want to hurt others.
Really, because in your opinion your hate and bigotry about Freddie Kitchens was posted for all to see.
Your credibility when it comes to hate and bigotry is nil.
An unrelated topic that has nothing to do with my post above. You just want to attack me for the sake of attacking me. He sounded like a hick the day I said that. A backwoods hick who had no business being made HC of the Browns. He's grown on me since, but he still has to prove himself as a HC.
You're butt sore over my feelings about how he presented himself 'in my opinion' and the fact that I spoke up. well, I don't care how that made you feel or how you took it. And I don't think a white hillbilly calling a white southerner a hick is in anyway shape or form bigotry OR hate. So go get a life.
Insert black person in your narrative above.
And then go tell us some more about how youre not a bigot.
What I said was not at all racial. But you keep trying to make it racial. When did southern hick become a race? You sound foolish.
The foolish one is not me. Take your blinders off.
How does that description of my initial impression of him make me a bigot? You are both just attacking me to instigate a ban.
A guy like rocky comes in here two days ago and says that socialism only works in Vermont because the population is mostly white and white people care about the greater good... I saw nothing from you.
Eve gets a little juiced up every now and then and drags this crap out of her closet of misfit BS and now you want me to admit I'm some kind of bigot? Arch I took up for you the other day when you were trolled after admitting you had a gay son, yet I'm a bigot? You two are both just ridiculous to the nth degree.
I'm just giving you crap. Its like bigots talking about bigots make me roll my eyes.
And I'm in a good mood with nothing to research at the moment.
Stop.
I still love you, but you know what you are...
I have a reason to celebrate. I solved a problem that plagued me for the last six months that was stressing me out. And even Googles stupid core update that tanked some of my keywords couldnt ruin it.
Arch I took up for you the other day when you were trolled after admitting you had a gay son, yet I'm a bigot? You two are both just ridiculous to the nth degree.
You 'took up" for me? Thanks, but I don't need you doing that. Doesn't change anything. People want to accept? Great. People don't want to? Great. Changes nothing.
I've never found that telling the truth is something to be ashamed of, or lauded for.
Arch I took up for you the other day when you were trolled after admitting you had a gay son, yet I'm a bigot? You two are both just ridiculous to the nth degree.
You 'took up" for me? Thanks, but I don't need you doing that. Doesn't change anything. People want to accept? Great. People don't want to? Great. Changes nothing.
I've never found that telling the truth is something to be ashamed of, or lauded for.
Hey I'm all for going at each other in here over our politics and all but family is off limits IMO. So yes I did say something when I saw it and would do it again. But don't worry you can still attack me at will, I don't feel like you owe me for doing what was right or anything. So please do continue with your gotcha moment hunting.
No, I don't. I wouldn't find it said if I went to a restaurant where they didn't serve what I wanted, either.
Bacon isn't on the menu at a Muslim restaurant. Cake is on the menu at a bakery. Nobody asked a bakery to serve them bacon.
Quote:
Went to a local, good home cooking restaurant about 10 years ago. 15 of us. Slow time of day. Waitress said we could move 3 tables together. We did.
Owner came out and bitched about it. We ate, and my mom and dad haven't been back, and I've been there twice, with that though always in my head: They wanted our business THEIR way.
Should I have, or my parents, sued them? No. Shut up, and take your business elsewhere.
Yet they didn't refuse you service, did they?
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Would you be fine going into a muslim restaurant, and demanding they serve you bacon? And if they don't, you sue them?
Arch, this is not the nature of the fight. Now if the restaurant served bacon, but wouldn't serve it to you for some reason, that is the nature of the fight. Nobody would demand that a restaurant that doesn't serve bacon be forced to serve bacon... but if you are going to serve it, you have to serve it to everybody.
While I understand some of what you are saying, you and a few others on here were always slippery slope types when it came to gay marriage.
I'm a slippery slope person about a lot of things, gay marriage isn't really one of them any more.. thanks in large part to you.
As for the rest of the questions you asked, I don't have a great answer for all of them.. Generally I have stated that anybody who has responsibility for health and safety should not be given religious exemption...
For private businesses I find it to be far more complicated... on one hand, I believe that we have come far enough that if a bakery doesn't want to serve cakes for gay events, the market will fill that void and the market will decide which business gets to be successful and which doesn't.
I also understand that some folks might have some pretty bizarre stipulations in the name of their religion... so let the market determine if people are willing to continue to do business with them...
Don't you find it sad that in 2019 he has to be 'smart enough' to avoid the hatred and bigotry?
I find it sad that in every instance where somebody wants to try to live into their religious convictions, that you immediately assign the label of hateful bigot on that person.. shows a genuine lack of tolerance and understanding by you as an individual...
Supreme Court rules Peace Cross war memorial can stand
By Ronn Blitzer
Fox News
Supreme Court says Peace Cross war memorial can stay
The Supreme Court has ruled that a Peace Cross war memorial on public land outside Washington, D.C., can stand; Shannon Bream reports on the 7-2 decision.
The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a Peace Cross war memorial on public land outside Washington, D.C., can stand, determining in a 7-2 decision that it does not violate the Constitution.
Residents of Prince George’s County, Maryland and the American Humanist Association (AHA) had sued to have the cross taken down, and the American Legion, whose symbol is also on the memorial, intervened to defend it. While the residents and AHA claimed that a cross memorial on public land violated the Constitution, the Court determined that factors, including the history of the memorial, support the idea that it is not religious in nature.
“For nearly a century, the Bladensburg Cross has expressed the community’s grief at the loss of the young men who perished, its thanks for their sacrifice, and its dedication to the ideals for which they fought,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the court’s opinion. Alito noted that while this particular cross does not serve a religious purpose, removing it because it is a cross would be a religiously charged action.
“It has become a prominent community landmark, and its removal or radical alteration at this date would be seen by many not as a neutral act but as the manifestation of ‘a hostility toward religion that has no place in our Establishment Clause traditions,’” he wrote, quoting Justice Breyer’s concurrence in the 2005 decision in Van Orden v. Perry.
The court's decision reverses the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled that the cross was unconstitutional.
The 7-2 majority on Thursday cited the structure's historical nature in its narrowly drawn decision, saying the Latin cross design reflected the nationwide trend at the time it was erected to honor war dead with community monuments. The cross was associated with World War I, and the Court noted that the U.S. used it in military honors, such as the Distinguished Service Cross in 1918 and Navy Cross in 1919.
The Bladensburg Peace Cross, as it is known, sits in a traffic circle in the Washington suburbs to honor 49 local World War I soldiers who died in battle overseas.
Its supporters, including the Trump administration, said it was created solely to honor those heroes and is secular in nature. Opponents called it an impermissible overlap of church and state, since it is controlled and cared for by a Maryland parks commission.
The Court noted that while the cross has its roots in Christianity, it currently appears contexts that are “indisputably secular,” such as trademarks for Blue Cross Blue Shield, Bayer Group, and certain products from Johnson & Johnson.
The Court also made a distinction between keeping established monuments with religious symbols, like the Peace Cross, and erecting new ones, stating, "Familiarity itself can become a reason for preservation," and, "The passage of time gives rise to a strong presumption of constitutionality."
Even AHA recognized that cross memorials may be permissible in some cases, like certain World War I Latin crosses in Arlington National Cemetery. While AHA claimed that those crosses are different because they are in a cemetery and are more associated with individual soldiers, the Court said that does not make a difference, as memorials serve the same purpose as gravestones for many grieving families.
Ultimately, the Court determined that despite the religious significance of crosses in general, this particular memorial does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, even though public funds are used for its upkeep.
"[T]there is no evidence of discriminatory intent in the selection of the design of the memorial or the decision of a Maryland commission to maintain it," the Court said. "The Religion Clauses of the Constitution aim to foster a society in which people of all beliefs can live together harmoniously, and the presence of the Bladensburg Cross on the land where it has stood for so many years is fully consistent with that aim."
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg took issue with the notion that a cross could be secularized just because it serves as a war memorial.
"Just as a Star of David is not suitable to honor Christians who died serving their country, so a cross is not suitable to honor those of other faiths who died defending their nation," she wrote in a dissenting opinion, where she was joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. The dissent claimed that by having the Peace Cross on a public highway, the government "elevates Christianity over other faiths, and religion over nonreligion."
Actually it's more about how Christianity is used as a weapon. In this case it's about the constitution. Religious freedom. If one religion is represented in a public place, all religions should be represented in a public place. If not, no religion should be should be represented in a public place.
Sometimes people wish to perceive honoring the constitution as hostility. Sometimes people perceive equality for everyone as hostility. I understand that if you are a Christian, you may have a preconceived bias as to your opinion of what is and what is not hostility. It's much easier to put your personal beliefs in front of others who do not share those same beliefs.
I myself am a Christian. But I've never seen using my beliefs in a way to treat others as inferior or unworthy who do not share my beliefs. Or to refuse to be humane and kind to them. I've also never tried to use my beliefs to claim my beliefs are more important or more worthy of recognition than the belief of others.
Others feel differently than that and that's fine. Bottom line is it's not Christianity I have an issue with. It's the way some people act and feel that are Christians I take issue with.
In a nation of laws and equal religious liberties, it seems quite foreign to me for anyone to think their religious symbols and religious beliefs are somehow a compass that all citizens must bow to. According to you, I guess that doesn't make me a very good Christian. My view is quite different.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
I thought you promoted civil discord and healthy debate? So much for that idea huh? Maybe I'm not the one who's [censored] stupid?
No, I think we've come a long way in the past 100 years and it's time we act like that rather than letting those who lived over 100 years ago dictate what's proper now. I guess we could go back to the time before civil rights and Jim Crow laws though.
Is that what MAGA means?
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Atheists cry foul after 18 high school football players get baptized on field
"We request that the district investigate and take the appropriate steps to ensure there will be no further illegal religious events, including team baptisms, during school-sponsored activities," wrote Christopher Line, a FFRF legal fellow. "Coaches and school staff should be instructed that they can neither organize nor participate in religious activities with students while acting in their official capacity."
*Raising my hand* um excuse me where does it say this was done at a "School Sponsored activity" ? The article says the coaches " oversaw 18 football players get baptized near the field" it was done on a late Thursday afternoon, so School was already out. IF it was done on their own time and was not sponsored by the school then I don't see any problem.
