Mormon church opposes federal LGBTQ nondiscrimination measure

no business has the right to discriminate based on race or gender

 

because some get away with it does not make it right, if an insurance companies has been charging blacks more for decades, they shoudl be punished

 

Businesses do not have rights at all.

Individuals do. A business is not a person

Yes a business OWNER has the right to discriminate just like everyone else does.

You discriminate any way you see fit so do I and we have the right to.

There is no moral or ethical justification to violate the rights of humans which you support

Rights apply to all equally or they mean nothing

 

now now, Republicans say business are people too

 

So businesses individuals have the right to discriminate against black people? You must not own or manage any businesses... I assure you, that business would not be around long.

 

No they do not

 

Yes they do.

I agree totally and already discussed that.

Yes the vast majority of business owners would operate in such a manner that the only color they would care about is green.

But the owners still have rights and if an owner wishes to cut himself off from profit by being a bigot that is his problem and yes it will hurt them economically. Which is fine

 

They cannot though.
It is illegal in hiring and places of public accommodation

 

You need to keep up

Yes they cannot which is exactly the point being discussed. The law forbidding them from doing so is immoral

 

They don't believe that at all. They believe legislation against a non problem normally produces more unintended consequences than benefits. I'm not aware that these people are denied employment because of sexual preference. You are worried about a small minority of conservatives.

 

Morality is subjective, in other words that’s your opinion only.

Individuals are free to not open a business or make it a private members only facility if they wish to select their clientele. Opening a for profit “open to the public” facility agrees to adhere to local state and federal laws of such establishments.

 

There is no such thing as open to the public. By definition a business is open to select people.

The laws about such establishments is precisely what is immoral and no it is not subjective.

When government discriminates against individuals it is oppression of select individuals. Which is immoral and a violation of the principle of equality under the law.

There is no rational or intelligent argument to respect the rights of most individuals to discriminate while violating that right for others which is precisely what those laws do

 

Maybe you could offer them weekend classes or something.

 

maybe the right could stop putting "I like beer" judges accused of sexual crimes in these lifetime positions

 

Ah yes, the moral left is going to preach to me about their failed attempt to slur a man who has led one of the squeakiest clean lives anyone has ever seen.

You know, just because some woman of questionable mental health makes a claim no one else remembers happening, it doesn't make it true no matter how much you wish for it.

I can see I'm wasting facts, logic and time here though, so go forth and do whatever it is you do.

 

Being "accused of sexual crimes" is not the same as being convicted of sexual crimes. Until allegations are proven in a court of law, they should have no impact on a judges confirmation. IF that is your standard of evidence, there is absolutely nothing preventing partisans from flinging the charge at every single judge they oppose.

There should be repercussions for false accusations. For example, there should be a trial to see if the partisan hack that lied about Kavanaugh was indeed lying. If she is found to be lying by a court, she should get a decade in prison and have her personal wealth confiscated. The example we make of her would halt future gold-diggers and hatchetmen in their tracks.

 

sure he has... you have a bridge you want to sell us too

 

during his job interview, accusations of being drunk and sexual abusing a women came up... part of his defense.... "I like Beer" ---- Republicans hired him anyways

 

I like beer too. There is something profoundly unAmerican about people who don't like beer. I found it hysterical when Elizabeth Warren pretended she knew how to drink a beer.



It wasn't a defense. Democrats apparently thought it was a gotcha if a man "admitted" to liking beer in college. This shows you how completely divorced from reality Democrats are. When I was in college, only the most fringe losers and disaffected loners weren't drinking beer. Quit trying to demonize normality!

 

when during a job interview, your accused of getting drunk and sexually abusing a women, most people woudl not get the job if part of their defense was "I like beer" - but for republicans, that is a requirement nowadays it seems

 

Great. Tell us what he did?

Drank beer as a young man? Got drunk? Oh noes. Lock up the planet.

I'd love to see a bunch of lunatic leftists clawing at the SCOTUS doors again, that was great optics.

 

He CATEGORICALLY DENIED ever sexually abusing a "women". "I like beer" was NEVER a defense for abusing women. You are either ill-informed or disingenuous. Please backup your assertion or retract it.

 

Says the people who go "meh" at all the top Democrats in Virginia.

 

Religious zealots will be what they are - a brainwashed mob that puts religious belief above the founding principles.

 

the "i like beer" comment is well known, look it up yourself